Watershed Sanitary Survey for the San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds, March 2007

Watershed Sanitary Survey for the San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds, March 2007

An Update to the San Lorenzo Valley and Watershed and North Coast Watersheds Sanitary Survey, July 1996

Report Prepared for Chris Berry City of Santa Cruz Water Department

Balance Hydrologics, Inc. in association with Kennedy/Jenks Consultants

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

Watershed Sanitary Survey for the San Lorenzo and North Coast Watersheds, March 2007

An Update to the San Lorenzo Valley and Watershed and North Coast Watersheds Sanitary Survey, July 1996

Report prepared for: Chris Berry City of Santa Cruz Water Department

Prepared by: Balance Hydrologics, Inc. In association with Kennedy/Jenks Consultants

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

March 2007

Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Table of Contents Sanitary Survey

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PLATE 1 P-1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY E-1 SECTION 1 – INTRODUCTION 1-1 SECTION 2 - WATERSHED AND WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS 2-1 SECTION 3 - POTENTIAL CONTAMINANT SOURCES IN THE WATERSHEDS 3-1 SECTION 4 - WATERSHEDS MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL PRACTICES 4-1 SECTION 5 - WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS AND EVALUATION 5-1 SECTION 6 - CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6-1

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A. Bibliography and references cited Appendix B. Federal and State drinking water standards Appendix C. Timber harvests 2001 – 2006

206081 Master TOC 3-09-07.doc Castle Rock State Park

r

e

v i

R

o z n ! re Waterman Gap o L n a 0 ³ 12,000 S

B o u Scale: Feet ld e r C re e k B ea r C r e e k k ee k r Redwood e C M re l a C l r e e C Grove ar re ! B w ek e ohnston o N J Cree w k T

Loch Lomond Watershed Peavine Creek Watershed (SLVWD)

Silver Creek !Boulder Creek Watershed (SLVWD) Lompico and S Mill Creek Foreman Creek an Lo Watershed Watershed (SLVWD) C re le n k ar k z e Cre e o e !r R Lompico Harmon Creek C iv e Watershed (SLVWD) k o r e GF c

i e k r p e e C m r Clear Creek l o l C L Watershed (SLVWD) e te w n e a y N Sweetwater Creek !a Zayante Watershed (SLVWD) Z Ma ns F on a Cr ll C e r e ! e k Olympia e k

!Felton Cree k Benn Bea n ett Creek Felton Diversion (SCWD) R reek e C Mill GF g Shingle g

i h a G ulc r old G d o

C r Liddell Spring (SCWD) e Laguna Creek (SCWD) Henry Cowell e GF GFGFk Redwoods jors Cr State Park a ee Reggiardo Creek (SCWD) M k

k e re C P na gu Majors Creek (SCWD) a La P! c GF i Tait Well #3 Tait Well #1 f A@ i GF S c a n Tait Well #4 L o r e O n z o c R e iv e a r n

Santa Cruz GIS Data Source: Santa Cruz County

! Area Locations Santa Cruz City Water Supply Watersheds San Lorenzo Valley and P! Graham Hill WTP Sub-Watershed North Coast Watersheds GF Santa Cruz Water Department Diversions General Urbanized Areas Designated Open Space A@ City of Santa Cruz Wells (GWUDI only) Plate 1 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Executive Summary Sanitary Survey

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

E. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 1 E.1 INTRODUCTION...... 1 E.2 KEY FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ...... 2 E.2.1 Contaminants of concern...... 2 E.2.2 Contaminant sources ...... 3 E.2.3 Required disinfection practices ...... 3 E.2.4 Existing watershed management ...... 4 E.3 KEY RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 4

Ex sum 03-09-07.doc E-i Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Executive Summary Sanitary Survey

E. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

E.1 Introduction

This report describes the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of an update to the San Lorenzo River and North Coast watersheds sanitary survey in Santa Cruz County. The objectives of this project were to:

ƒ Prepare a stand-alone sanitary survey that complies with the California Department of Health Services (DHS) requirements to update the watershed sanitary survey originally produced in 1996 and first updated in 2001.

ƒ Provide a comprehensive description of the study area, water supply systems, and regulatory environment.

ƒ Identify contaminants of concern related to the source quality of the drinking water systems.

ƒ Identify the sources of existing and potential contaminants.

ƒ Based on a water quality evaluation, assess the level of treatment and disinfection required by drinking water regulations.

ƒ Recommend corrective actions to protect and improve water quality in the study area.

ƒ Comply with the requirements of the Surface Water Treatment Rule enforced by the DHS.

Three community water suppliers were actively involved with the update: Santa Cruz Water Department (SCWD), San Lorenzo Valley Water District (SLVWD), and Lompico County Water District (LCWD). In addition, Santa Cruz County, representing several small systems, was a key participant. Each draws from separate and multiple supplies and shares the San Lorenzo River watershed as the primary source of drinking water for their respective systems. The San Lorenzo River watershed, measured from the downstream-most intake at the north edge of the City of Santa Cruz, covers about 115 square miles and includes numerous subwatersheds, which vary in the quantity and quality of water provided. Urban, suburban, and rural land uses are generally

Ex sum 03-09-07.doc E-1 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Executive Summary Sanitary Survey concentrated along the river and its various tributaries. The remaining portions of the watershed have steep slopes which limit access.

Three watersheds are in the North Coast area of Santa Cruz County, all used exclusively by the SCWD. These contiguous watersheds are located on the western slope of Ben Lomond Mountain, where rural land uses and open space are predominant upstream of the water supply intake structures. Plate 1 shows the general locations of major raw water intakes within the San Lorenzo River and North Coast watersheds.

E.2 Key Findings and Conclusions E.2.1 Contaminants of concern

The primary contaminants of concern in the watersheds continue to be pathogens, particulate matter, and nitrate-nitrogen, all of which can be used as general watershed and water quality indicators.

ƒ Monitoring results in both the San Lorenzo and the North Coast Watersheds show an increasing trend in bacteria levels over the most recent five-year period that is most likely attributable to increased development. The emerging technology of microbial source tracking using ribotyping was applied by the County in the San Lorenzo River watershed.

ƒ Turbidity, an index of particulate matter, is related to increased protozoa concentrations in surface waters. Turbidity levels tend to be greater during months of high stormwater runoff, requiring water purveyors to intermittently rely on alternative sources during these periods. Recent monitoring data show a slight decrease in turbidity at the Ben Lomond and Big Trees stations since the previous survey, and a slight increase at Loch Lomond and Majors Creek.

ƒ Elevated nitrate concentrations in these waters are indicative of the widespread use of septic systems to treat and dispose of household wastewater, and runoff from confined animal facilities. Measured nitrate levels show a seasonal pattern related to rainfall but were significantly less than the Maximum Concentration Level. Nitrate levels tend to be higher in

Ex sum 03-09-07.doc E-2 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Executive Summary Sanitary Survey

Boulder Creek and the sandy soil areas to the east of the San Lorenzo River. During the most recent five-year period, nitrate concentrations at the Felton and Tait Street sampling points continue to decrease, while Loch Lomond and Liddell Spring now show increasing trends.

E.2.2 Contaminant sources

Urban runoff is a significant source of bacteria, nitrate and sediment. Most urban development in the San Lorenzo Valley is residential with homes very close to and positioned well above the stream system, such that contaminants can move rapidly from neighborhood areas into the channels. Homes overlying sandy soils contribute a disproportionate volume of nutrients which enter the streams through the sandy aquifers. In residential areas, source control to reduce runoff has particular value as a way of reducing contaminants.

Other significant contaminant sources include: timber harvests, which result in erosion from the roads constructed to access logging areas; confined animal facilities, which introduce bacteria and nitrate when contact between animals and water supplies occurs; and unauthorized activities, such as small-scale grading and homeless encampments.

E.2.3 Required disinfection practices

DHS drinking water regulations require a minimum level of disinfection at all surface water treatment plants to inactivate pathogenic organisms. If the water supply sources are found to contain high levels of total coliform bacteria, the minimum disinfection requirements may be increased by DHS. Coliform bacteria levels in the San Lorenzo River tributaries are low to moderate; therefore utilities which use these sources comply with the current disinfection requirements. However, moderate to high concentrations of total coliform are often measured at the Tait Street intake used by SCWD. Blending with other sources brings water treatment plant influent into compliance.

One of the major issues facing SCWD in the next several years is the potential that in- stream flow requirements to meet Endangered Species Act (ESA) requirements will be established for some of the North Coast sources, which could reduce the volume of flow available from these locations. The primary consequence of reduced North Coast flow would be greater reliance on water from Loch Lomond, which has a higher total organic carbon (TOC) concentration, and hence a higher potential for formation of disinfection

Ex sum 03-09-07.doc E-3 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Executive Summary Sanitary Survey byproducts. City staff has already begun to discuss, at the conceptual level, the implications of ESA in-stream flows requirements on water supply management.

E.2.4 Existing watershed management

The County of Santa Cruz Health Services Agency, in concert with the Central Coast office of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), has developed a watershed management approach with the primary objective being to protect and improve water quality conditions in the project area. This agency and the County Planning Department use a set of established policies, regulations, and ordinances to control improper and unauthorized activities that can degrade water quality. Along with the various ordinances, the County has developed nitrate and wastewater management plans. Implementation of specific actions detailed in these plans should improve water quality. The County has facilitated the repair of many failing septic systems. Voluntary measures promoted by the County and the equestrian community seem to be successful in improving conditions at confined animal facilities. Outreach regarding these measures will need to be continued, given increasing numbers of horses in the San Lorenzo watershed.

The SCWD manages its lands to maintain optimal water quality. The SLVWD also administers their Watershed Protection Plan to maintain optimal water quality, while limiting access and minimizing potential land disturbances.

E.3 Key Recommendations

Recommendations from the original 1996 survey and the 2001 update are listed in Table 6-3, with status reviews where necessary. Key recommendations from this update are:

ƒ Continue to publish monitoring data on the internet in an effort to increase accessibility and usability of data. Pesticides and herbicides should be added to the monitoring program, and TOC sampling should be increased.

ƒ Problematic septic systems should be inspected on a routine basis and upgraded as needed. Inspection and upgrade activities should be well documented.

Ex sum 03-09-07.doc E-4 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Executive Summary Sanitary Survey

ƒ Emphasize acquisition of watershed lands or conservation easements in order to protect drinking water sources and/or aquatic habitat.

ƒ Increase County implementation of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II program control measures while awaiting RWQCB adoption.

ƒ In sandy soils, the disproportionate increases in volume of urban runoff mean that the runoff itself causes erosion and related contamination. At a minimum, we recommend that purveyors and the County raise awareness of this issue and develop sandy-soil BMP guidelines which minimize increases in erosion and sedimentation. Optimally, we suggest that a more holistic approach guide land and water uses in the sandy-soil areas1.

ƒ Lobby for water purveyor inclusion in the timber harvest plan review team – rather than serving an advisory role – and develop guidelines appropriate to special geologic conditions magnifying sediment delivery from lands managed for timber harvests.

ƒ Initiate water purveyor-focused discussion with the RWQCB on water supply issues.

ƒ Water purveyors and the County should continue to explore emerging technologies (including ribotyping) to identify contamination sources and to treat water.

1 The sandy soils holistic approach should include measures which (a) limit erosion, (b) reduce sedimentation of streams and drainage improvements, (c) maintain needed recharge to the sandy aquifers, critical to the region’s drought-year water supply, (d) sustain sufficient recharge to protect water quality and control nitrate accumulation in the aquifers, and (e) allow springs and wetlands supported by these aquifers to maintain their functions and values.

Ex sum 03-09-07.doc E-5 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 1 Sanitary Survey Introduction

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 STUDY AREA...... 1 1.2 WATERSHED SANITARY SURVEY REQUIREMENTS ...... 1 1.3 OBJECTIVES ...... 2 1.4 PARTICIPATING DRINKING WATER UTILITIES ...... 3 1.5 REPORT ORGANIZATION...... 3

Section 1 03-09-07.doc 1-i Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 1 Sanitary Survey Introduction

1. INTRODUCTION

Sanitary surveys are required by the California Department of Health Services (DHS) to be completed for each watershed that is a drinking water source. Updates are required every five years. These requirements are part of the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) mandated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and enforced by DHS.

This sanitary survey includes the San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast watersheds, all within Santa Cruz County, California (Plate 1). The first sanitary survey for this area was completed in 1996 by Camp Dresser & McKee, and updated in 2001 by the City of Santa Cruz Water Department. The 2006 update is intended to be a stand-alone document. Where there have been no changes, it contains the same descriptions and analyses that were reported in the 1996 sanitary survey and the 2001 update.

This sanitary survey update is based on numerous discussions with utility and regulatory staff, review of various reports, an evaluation of historic and recent water quality monitoring results, and analyses of the ongoing management practices within the watershed area.

1.1 Study Area

Plate 1 illustrates the approximate watershed boundaries of the San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast watersheds, all within Santa Cruz County. The San Lorenzo Valley is the watershed for numerous water purveyors. The North Coast watersheds included in this study provide water only to the City of Santa Cruz Water Department (SCWD). There are several large surface water intakes located throughout the study area.

1.2 Watershed Sanitary Survey Requirements

A watershed sanitary survey is a detailed evaluation of surface water sources and their vulnerability to contamination. It is more comprehensive than a Source Water Assessment (SWA) and can be used in place of a SWA to fulfill the requirements of California’s 1996 Drinking Water Source Assessment and Protection (DWSAP) Program. Whereas a SWA ranks and inventories possible contaminating activities (PCAs) located within the source area, a sanitary survey provides more background, descriptive

Section 1 03-09-07.doc 1-1 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 1 Sanitary Survey Introduction information, and review of all relevant monitoring data. A SWA has been completed for each individual SCWD water source (Johnson, 2002, 2003, 2005).

Specific sanitary survey requirements are:

ƒ Conduct a sanitary survey of the watershed(s) at least every five years.

ƒ Describe the hydrogeological conditions of the watershed, summarize source water quality data, describe activities and possible contamination sources, and identify any significant changes since a previous survey was conducted.

ƒ Describe watershed control and management practices.

ƒ Evaluate compliance with the SWTR with a focus on disinfection requirements.

ƒ Recommend corrective actions to maintain or improve water quality.

1.3 Objectives

The objectives of this project are to:

ƒ Prepare a stand-alone document that complies with the DHS requirements to update the 1996 and 2001 watershed sanitary surveys.

ƒ Identify potential sources where chemical and microbiological contaminants may enter the water supply.

ƒ Establish the baseline information needed for a watershed management program.

ƒ Recommend actions to enhance water quality protection and watershed management.

ƒ The drinking water purveyors involved in this project should use this report to compare existing water quality conditions with future monitoring data, implement improvements to improve water quality, and reduce the risk of source water contamination.

Section 1 03-09-07.doc 1-2 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 1 Sanitary Survey Introduction

1.4 Participating Drinking Water Utilities

A number of drinking water utilities are participating in this project because they receive surface water from the San Lorenzo Valley watershed area. The water purveyors that participated in this update include:

ƒ City of Santa Cruz Water Department (SCWD)

ƒ Santa Cruz County [on behalf of the small systems they represent: Brackenbrae Mutual Water Company (MWC), Forest Springs MWC, Bonnymede MWC, Olympia MWC, and River Grove MWC].

ƒ San Lorenzo Valley Water District (SLVWD)

ƒ Lompico County Water District (LCWD)

Other utilities directly participated in the 1996 original survey and the 2001 update:

ƒ California-American [Cal-Am] (formerly Citizens Utilities Company of California1 [Citizens]) – 1996 and 2001

ƒ Quaker Center – 1996 and 2001

ƒ Brackenbrae Mutual Water Company (MWC) - 1996

ƒ River Grove MWC - 1996

ƒ Big Redwood Park MWC – 1996 and 2001

ƒ Forest Springs MWC – 1996

ƒ Sequoia Seminar - 2001

1.5 Report Organization

This report follows the format in the Watershed Sanitary Survey Guidance Manual as required by DHS so that it conforms with reports developed by other suppliers for their watershed areas. Specific sections are:

1 Citizens was acquired by Cal-Am in 2002.

Section 1 03-09-07.doc 1-3 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 1 Sanitary Survey Introduction

Section 1: Introduction

Section 2: Watershed and Water Supply System

Section 3: Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

Section 4: Watershed Management and Control Practices

Section 5: Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

Section 6: Conclusions and Recommendations

Plate 1, located at the front of this report, illustrates the approximate watershed boundaries, key subwatersheds, location of the large raw water intakes, primary roadways, and streams within the study area. This plate and other watershed figures will be referred to throughout the report.

Section 1 03-09-07.doc 1-4 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2. WATERSHEDS AND WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS ...... 1 2.1 WATERSHED DESCRIPTION ...... 1 2.1.1 Regional hydrologic setting...... 1 2.1.2 Prior studies ...... 1 2.1.3 Significance of storms, droughts and baseflow...... 3 2.2 LAND USE AND WATER QUALITY ...... 5 2.2.1 Land use...... 6 2.2.2 Residential ...... 7 2.2.3 Agricultural uses and animal grazing ...... 9 2.2.4 Timber harvests ...... 9 2.2.5 Mining...... 10 2.2.6 Recreation...... 11 2.2.7 Reservoir sedimentation ...... 11 2.3 NATURAL CONDITIONS AND WATER QUALITY ...... 12 2.3.1 Soils and geology...... 13 2.3.2 Faults and seismic activity...... 14 2.3.3 Volcanic activity ...... 15 2.3.4 Vegetation...... 15 2.3.5 Wildlife ...... 16 2.4 WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS BACKGROUND ...... 17 2.4.1 History ...... 17 2.4.2 Santa Cruz Water Department (SCWD) ...... 18 2.4.3 San Lorenzo Valley Water District (SLVWD)...... 19 2.4.4 Lompico County Water District (LCWD) ...... 19 2.5 WATER SOURCES ...... 20 2.5.1 Santa Cruz Water Department...... 20 2.5.2 North Coast ...... 20 2.5.3 San Lorenzo River - Tait Street diversion...... 21 2.5.4 San Lorenzo River - Felton Diversion ...... 22 2.5.5 Loch Lomond on Newell Creek...... 22 2.5.6 SLVWD ...... 23 2.5.7 Lompico County Water District...... 23 2.6 WATER RIGHTS ...... 23 2.6.1 SCWD ...... 23 2.6.2 Other utilities...... 24 2.6.3 Water quantity ...... 24 2.6.4 Source management...... 24 2.7 FACILITIES ...... 25 2.7.1 Raw water reservoirs...... 25 2.7.2 Intakes/conveyance systems...... 26 2.7.2.1 SCWD...... 26 2.7.2.2 SLVWD ...... 26 2.7.2.3 LCWD...... 26 2.7.3 Treatment plants/processes ...... 27 2.7.3.1 SCWD...... 27 2.7.3.2 SLVWD ...... 27 2.7.3.3 LCWD...... 28 2.7.4 Pipeline data, capacity ...... 28 2.7.5 Satellite treatment facilities ...... 28 2.8 EMERGENCY PLANS ...... 28 2.8.1 SCWD ...... 29 2.8.2 SLVWD ...... 30 2.8.3 LCWD...... 30

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-i Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2-1 Watershed Areas and Drinking Water Purveyors Served

Table 2-2 Summary of Drinking Water Purveyors Serving Surface Water with more than 200 Service Connections in the Study Area

Table 2-3 Summary of Small and Non-Participating Drinking Water Purveyors in the San Lorenzo River Watershed

Table 2-4 Summary of SCWD Water Rights

Table 2-5 Summary of Surface Water Rights for Utilities with more than 200 Service Connections

Table 2-6 Summary of Water Sources Available for Utilities with more than 200 Service Connections

Table 2-7 Summary of Conveyance/Intake Facilities for Utilities with more than 200 Service Connections

Table 2-8 Summary of Surface Water Treatment Facilities for Utilities with more than 200 Service Connections

Table 2-9 Summary of Distribution Systems for Utilities with more than 200 Service Connections

Table 2-10 Summary of Distribution System Storage Reservoirs for Utilities with more than 200 Service Connections

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2-1 Process Layout of the Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant, Santa Cruz Water Department

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-ii Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

2. WATERSHEDS AND WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS

2.1 Watershed Description

The San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast watersheds and water purveyors which use surface water are described in this section. This description includes the San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast watersheds. The latter sources are used only by the SCWD. The watershed area, subwatersheds within the San Lorenzo Valley, and approximate land areas are listed in Table 2-1.1

2.1.1 Regional hydrologic setting

The project area includes the San Lorenzo River, Majors Creek, Laguna Creek, and Liddell Spring watersheds in north central Santa Cruz County. The San Lorenzo River watershed is the largest contiguous watershed area in the area with an overall area of about 115 square miles. The smaller North Coast watersheds are west of the City of Santa Cruz and drain the coastal side of Ben Lomond Mountain. The North Coast watersheds have a total area of about 5,600 acres, or approximately 9 square miles. The SCWD maintains one large reservoir, Loch Lomond, on Newell Creek, a tributary to the San Lorenzo River.

2.1.2 Prior studies

The City and County of Santa Cruz, as well as the area water purveyors, have conducted evaluations of watershed management, water supply, and water quality protection. Key existing information sources include hydrologic and water quality studies conducted by the County of Santa Cruz, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board), California Department of Water Resources, local water purveyors, and consulting specialists. Much of this work is considered and cited in several summary reports (Ricker, 1994; Hecht and others, 1991; Camp Dresser & McKee, 1994; Swanson, 2001; and the pending San Lorenzo River Watershed Plan update). Pertinent findings of the prior investigations are incorporated into this report.

1 Because Ben Lomond Mountain is so asymmetrical, with a steep eastern face, it is likely that subsurface flows from near its crest drains eastward into the San Lorenzo Valley (see Hecht, 1978; Johnson, 1999). Hence, headwardmost portions of the Laguna and Majors topographic watersheds may be recharge areas to San Lorenzo Valley sources.

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-1 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

Streamflow in the area has been measured by several resource agencies throughout the last several decades. In the San Lorenzo Valley, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) operates long-term stream gages at Big Trees (at the Henry Cowell State Park entrance road) and at Tait Street (near the City’s Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant) in cooperation with the City Water Department. In the past, USGS has maintained stream gages on the San Lorenzo River at Waterman Switch (known as “near Boulder Creek”), Big Trees, and Santa Cruz, and on both Zayante and Branciforte Creeks. Since 1989, the USGS has maintained stream gages on Bean and Carbonera Creeks2 in Scotts Valley. Other USGS gages operated for multi-year periods in the San Lorenzo watershed include: the San Lorenzo River at Boulder Creek, Boulder and Bear Creeks near Boulder Creek, Zayante Creek at Zayante, and prior to the construction of Loch Lomond reservoir, Newell Creek. In the North Coast watersheds, the USGS once operated a long-term stream gage on San Vincente Creek, an adjoining watershed of similar size immediately to the west of Laguna Creek.

From 2000 to 2004, the City of Santa Cruz established ten gaging stations within the study area to help manage the water resource and in-stream habitat. Some of these stations occupy former USGS gaging stations. Two gages are located within the San Lorenzo Valley: on Newell Creek, above and below Loch Lomond. Eight gages are located in the North Coast watersheds. Three gages are on Laguna Creek, upstream and downstream of the diversion dam, and downstream at Highway 1. Three gages are located on Majors Creek, upstream and downstream of the diversion dam, and downstream at Highway 1. Two gages are located on Liddell Creek, immediately downstream of the spring box and at Highway 1. Some of these stations are equipped with specific conductance and temperature sensors or have had such measurements made routinely over the past several years.

Water quality stations were operated for several years at the San Lorenzo Valley gages by the USGS or the California Department of Water Resources (DWR).3 Water quality

2 Carbonera Creek, via Branciforte Creek, is tributary to the San Lorenzo River downstream of the City of Santa Cruz’s Tait Street intake, the downstream-most of the sources considered in this report. Results from the Carbonera Creek gage support and elucidate results from the adjacent Bean Creek, adding robustness or information value to the latter gage. 3 DWR also sampled the coastal streams for water quality on a monthly, and then on an intermittent basis, during the 1960s and 1970s.

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-2 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems and instantaneous flow were monitored intermittently in Kings, Two Bar, Love, Fall, and Lompico Creeks, and on lower Zayante Creek below Bean Creek, although no daily records were developed. Much of the USGS water-quality information has been summarized in a report by Sylvester and Covay (1978). Santa Cruz County has routinely sampled an array of other stations in the San Lorenzo Valley. The City of Santa Cruz regularly samples water quality in Loch Lomond, and at the Felton Diversion (near the Big Trees gage) and Tait Street intakes. The City monitors the North Coast sources bi-weekly and operates continuous turbidity monitoring stations at Tait Street, Upper Newell Creek and Liddell Creek. The San Lorenzo Valley Water District regularly samples water quality at each point of diversion: Clear Creek, Peavine Creek, Sweetwater Creek and Foreman Creek. Lompico County Water District staff sample at the Lompico Creek intake structure.

While streamflow gaging has diminished in the San Lorenzo Valley over the past 25 years, the number of stations at which water-quality sampling is conducted has gradually increased, as have the frequency of sampling and the number of constituents tested. Citizen monitoring of subwatersheds has been sustained at variable levels during the past 3 to 5 years, and if it continues, may prove a useful adjunct to the County’s watershed-wide program.

2.1.3 Significance of storms, droughts and baseflow

Streamflow in the Santa Cruz Mountains varies seasonally. About 85 percent of annual rainfall occurs in the six months from December through May. Winter precipitation generally does not increase streamflow until after soil saturation occurs, following the initial rains of the season, with the highest flows typically occurring from late December through March. Streamflow declines sharply after the winter rains cease. Snows are relatively rare in the Santa Cruz Mountains and do not create a meltwater-runoff season.

The longest continuous period of record in the area is the USGS gage on the San Lorenzo at Big Trees located just south of Felton (USGS Station No. 11160500). This gage has operated since 1937 and measures discharge from about 85 percent of the watershed upstream of the Tait Street Diversion. The maximum recorded discharge was 30,400 cfs (19,600 million gallons per day or ‘mgd’) on December 23, 1955. The minimum instantaneous daily discharge was 5.6 cfs (3.6 mgd) on July 27 and 28, 1977, during a

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-3 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems hard two-year drought. The annual mean runoff for the period of water year 1937 to water year 2005 is 133 cfs (86 mgd). Other currently gaged streams in the watershed include Bean Creek near Scotts Valley (period of record 1989 to present) and San Lorenzo River at Santa Cruz (periods of record 1952-1960, and 1987 to present).

Surface water quality in the San Lorenzo River basin fluctuates seasonally in relation to streamflow. During periods of high runoff, sediment and organic debris, urban runoff, animal wastes and wastewater from septic systems enter the surface water system. During dry periods and droughts, ground water sustains baseflow to the area streams. The ground-water quality varies widely because of both geologic and human influences. As ground water contributes to streamflow, it may carry dissolved constituents from the bedrock formations, discharges from septic systems, and other constituents that have percolated into the aquifer.

In general, water quality in the San Lorenzo Valley is primarily influenced by the three geologic subareas bounded by the Zayante and Ben Lomond faults (c.f., Battleson, 1966; Ricker and others, 1977; Sylvester and Covay, 1978). Streams draining the older sedimentary formations north of the Zayante fault contain relatively high concentrations of dissolved solids (c.f., Philips and Rojstaczer, 2001). The upper watersheds of the San Lorenzo River, and Kings, Two Bar, Bear, Zayante and Newell Creeks are all underlain mainly by erosive sedimentary formations, principally the Butano sandstone, Two Bar shale, Rices mudstone, Vaqueros sandstone, and Lambert shale.

Streams originating in the younger sedimentary formations, generally south of the Zayante fault and east of the Ben Lomond fault, contain water of intermediate quality. Rainfall runoff tends be slower because of the higher permeability soils that have developed on parts of the Santa Margarita sandstone, Lompico sandstone and Purisima formation (most commonly a water-bearing sandy shale, but locally quite sandy). Less permeable geologic formations in these eastside streams include the Monterey formation and the Santa Cruz mudstone. The high rates of recharge and relatively large available volumes within the Santa Margarita sandstone have resulted in extensive development of its water resources. Use of wells has lowered ground-water levels and diminished streamflow, altered the direction of ground-water flow, and helped to induce increases in the dissolved solids (‘salts’) and nitrate levels in this aquifer, originating (respectively)

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-4 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems from ground-water inflow from deeper aquifers and from partial recharge from leach fields or other sources that contribute human or livestock wastes. The larger streams that in summer flow largely from these formations include Bean, Zayante, Lompico, and Love Creeks.

San Lorenzo tributary streams draining the crystalline rocks west of the Ben Lomond fault have relatively lower concentrations of dissolved solids and tend to provide high quality water at reasonably constant rates. The weathered upper zone of the crystalline rocks (principally granodiorite, quartz diorite, schist, and marble) exposed on Ben Lomond Mountain serves to recharge precipitation and provide dry-season baseflow to the streams that drain the east side of Ben Lomond Mountain. These include Jamison, Peavine, Foreman, Malosky, Clear, Fall, and Shingle Mill Creeks, and Hubbard and Gold Gulches, as well as Bennett and Corvin Springs. Flows in Boulder Creek during dry seasons or drought years are also sustained primarily by flows emanating from these crystalline rocks. Hare Creek and upper Boulder Creek drain similar watersheds from Ben Lomond Mountain, but are underlain by sedimentary rocks generally yielding much lower rates of summer baseflow (Hecht, 1977).

Surface water in the streams draining the North Coast are also influenced by the same crystalline rocks of Ben Lomond Mountain. In addition, the Lompico sandstone, Monterey formation, and Santa Margarita sandstone overlay the crystalline rocks of Ben Lomond Mountain and provide ground-water storage and baseflow to the streams. Sinkholes and cavernous fractures occur in several parts of the Laguna and Majors Creek watersheds and at Liddell Spring, which serves as the most distant and reliable North Coast source of water for the SCWD. Upstream of the City’s diversion, Majors Creek has been generally and actively incising into the underlying alluvium and weathered sedimentary rocks since at least the 1960s (Hecht and others, 1968; Hecht, 1978), contributing waters that are typically more turbid than in Laguna Creek or at Liddell Spring (Camp Dresser McKee, 1996).

2.2 Land Use and Water Quality

This subsection describes land use and aspects of the natural setting that may affect potential contaminant sources.

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-5 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

2.2.1 Land use

There are a variety of land uses in the watershed including: timber production, quarrying, agriculture, ranching, rural residential and unincorporated communities with urban densities. In the 1960's and 1970's, Santa Cruz County experienced rapid growth in both population and development. The San Lorenzo Valley entered a period of transition from primarily seasonal vacation homes to full-time residences which are nearly complete today. The subsequent pressure on existing infrastructure and natural systems has led to several water quality issues worthy of note.

First, wastewater disposal through septic systems has increased as year-round residential occupancy increased. Second, new residential development occurred at the same time, adding more on-site disposal systems. Third, new development and subsequent activity in steep and remote areas of the watersheds has increased runoff and erosion, which led to increases in sedimentation and persistent turbidity in water supply streams. This can be attributed both to decisions made at the level of individual lots as well as cumulative impacts of widespread development. Fourth, continuous use of unpaved roads, especially in wet periods, contributes both sediment and turbidity to receiving waters. Partially offsetting these trends is growing acreage of lands no longer open to logging, most significantly in the headwaters of the San Lorenzo River and on lands of the San Lorenzo Valley Water District and the City of Santa Cruz Water Department.

Many of the same dynamics have affected land use in the North Coast watersheds, although the initial proportion of seasonal homes was much lower. Residential growth has been steady through the past 40 years. As in the San Lorenzo Valley, virtually all wastewater disposal is through leachfields, so the volume and areas of watershed affected are growing. Some areas with sandy soils critical for recharge of local aquifers sustaining baseflow have been protected in recent years by establishment of the Bonny Doon Ecological Preserve and by inclusion of the Grey Whale Ranch within Wilder Ranch State Park.

Plate 1 shows the general developed areas within the watersheds.

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-6 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

2.2.2 Residential

Within the survey area, the majority of the population is concentrated along Highway 9 on the floor of the San Lorenzo Valley. Steep slopes and rugged terrain have long been a significant constraint to commercial and residential development in all areas of Santa Cruz County. As a result, the county is rural in character, heavily forested, and visually dominated by open space.

The 2000 census gave a population of 44,284 people in the San Lorenzo Valley (Census Tracts 1203 through 1209). The San Lorenzo Valley continues to grow, albeit at slower rates than in the past (RWQCB, 2001). The 2000 census gave a population for the North Coast (Census Tract 1202) of 4,191, an increase over the 3,226 cited in the 1990 census. The actual population in the North Coast water supply watersheds is significantly less than the census tract value because the latter includes residents of Davenport, Swanton, and dispersed residences along Highway 1 which lie outside of the small watersheds above the SCWD intake structures.

Within the San Lorenzo Valley, the majority of the population lives in unincorporated communities located along the San Lorenzo River. Felton, Ben Lomond, Brookdale, and Boulder Creek stretch out along State Highway 9. Other communities have developed along major tributaries to the San Lorenzo, including the areas along Zayante Creek and Lompico Creek. Several closely-packed residential communities which originated as summer ‘encampments’ also exist in the area. These include the Paradise Park, Forest Lakes, Mount Hermon, Riverside Grove and San Lorenzo Park subdivisions. Conventional 1960s and 1970s subdivision communities established throughout the Valley include: the Boulder Creek Golf and Country Club, Galleon Heights, Bear Creek Estates, Quail Hollow and Glen Arbor, and the portions of Rollingwood and Pasatiempo which lie within the San Lorenzo watershed. There are, in fact, relatively few valleys without a few clusters of homes, now typically occupied year-round. More recently, stand-alone mountain residences have been arrayed along most ridgelines.

The population in the North Coast drainages is far less than that of the San Lorenzo Valley. The largest unincorporated area is known as Bonny Doon. Most of the

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-7 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems population lives in rural and mountainous areas, mainly along the major roads: Empire Grade, Smith Grade, and Bonny Doon and Martin Roads.

Scotts Valley (2000 pop. 11,385) is an incorporated city within the San Lorenzo watershed but most of the city lies beyond the eastern edge of the sanitary survey area, within the Carbonera Creek and Branciforte Creek subwatersheds. These two creeks flow into the San Lorenzo River within the city limits of Santa Cruz but below the Tait Street Diversion. However, key commercial and industrial centers of Scotts Valley drain to Bean Creek, which is within the study area.

The County of Santa Cruz Health Services Agency estimates that just under 13,500 parcels in the San Lorenzo River watershed are served by individual on-site wastewater disposal systems, most of which meet current standards (John Ricker, personal communication, 2007). Residences in the North Coast watersheds are also served by septic systems. However, there are relatively few community or institutional wastewater disposal systems within the survey area due to the remote nature and dispersed population of the watershed. Significant community disposal systems serve: Bear Creek Estates, Boulder Creek Golf and Country Club, Rollingwood and the Mt. Hermon Association. Institutional disposal systems are in service at: the San Lorenzo Valley Unified School District, Camp Harmon, Camp Campbell and at several other camps or conference centers in the San Lorenzo Valley.

Zoning and land development standards for the unincorporated portions of the county reflect an area-wide awareness of the potential adverse effects of wastewater disposal and other development-related impacts on water supply. Within the area, mountain residential is the lowest density range, where minimal services are available. These areas include various open space and natural resource conservation areas unsuitable for more intense development. Rural residential areas are the next highest density range, requiring access from roads maintained to rural road standards. Suburban residential areas require service from a public water system to develop at the highest allowed density. The most densely populated areas along Highway 9 — Felton, Paradise Park, and Boulder Creek — have been developed at density levels typical of many urban areas despite their rural surroundings. County policies designate that these communities be

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-8 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems limited to urban low density development unless community disposal systems are available.

Throughout the period of increasing population and development, new road construction, frequent landslides, road maintenance, and rainy season use of dirt roads by residents have been major sources of erosion to area streams. Overall, there are now heavier traffic loads during all seasons on all area roads.

2.2.3 Agricultural uses and animal grazing

Agricultural acreage in the San Lorenzo River and North Coast watersheds is limited because of the steep topography and limited tillable land. Following the widespread initial logging of the late 1800's and early 1900's, apples and other orchard fruits were, however, planted on the flatter newly opened slopes throughout the subject watersheds. Much of this acreage has been abandoned and now supports chaparral, second growth redwood forests, and residential development. Vineyards and Christmas tree farms occupy the largest amount of agricultural acreage.

Limited cattle grazing occurs in the North Coast drainages. Grazing leases are held on private lands and vary from year to year. Horses, on the other hand, are commonly kept by rural residents, and by several commercial stables. Confined animals are considered to be a potential source of nitrogen and pathogens (c.f., Hecht and others, 1991; White and Hecht, 1993, Ricker 1995, Ivanetich, 2006) and can also contribute to persistent turbidity in the area’s streams.

2.2.4 Timber harvests

Timber resources historically formed the foundation of the major industry in the Santa Cruz Mountains. Timber harvests continue in many parts of the watersheds, driven in large part by high current (2006) prices for timber, which make smaller harvests profitable for individual landowners. The average timber harvest size in the San Lorenzo River watershed from 2001 to 2006 was 106 acres (Appendix C).

During the past decade, both the San Lorenzo Valley Water District and the City of Santa Cruz have stopped timber harvesting, managing their watersheds for the yield of

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-9 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems water and for open-space uses. Concurrently, SLVWD and Lompico Water Districts have been cooperating in several different ways with Sempervirens Fund and other conservation groups to limit harvesting in their water-supply watersheds. Major cessations of harvesting have occurred or are in the process of occurring through this cooperative set of efforts in the SLVWD watershed lands on the east slope of Ben Lomond Mountain, in the upper San Lorenzo watershed, and in the upper Lompico watersheds.

2.2.5 Mining

Sand mining is the major mineral extraction activity in the survey area, although a number of operations have been closed over the past decade. There are several active sand operations in the vicinity of Scotts Valley. Marble (locally called ‘limestone’) is mined in the Bonny Doon area, upgradient of Liddell Spring, and is processed into cement at the nearby community of Davenport. This mining has been identified as a source of turbidity and nitrates (from explosives); related loadings and their effects on water quality are under investigation. Decomposed or weathering granitic rock is mined at Felton Quarry. Sand is still mined at the Quail Hollow Quarry but has been discontinued over the past five years at the Olympia and Hanson (‘Kaiser’) Quarries; stormwater releases from all three facilities have received regulatory scrutiny or action during the past decade.4 There are no commercial or informal instream gravel mining operations in the subject watersheds.

Exploratory drilling for oil and gas has been conducted throughout the survey area, principally during the 1950s and 1960s. No current or shut-in (potentially re-activatable) production is reported. The principal water-effects of drilling have been unquantified increases in the salinity of the local stream system associated with deep, highly saline waters emanating from several abandoned boreholes (c.f., Hecht, 1975).

Naturally-occurring asphaltum or bituminous sandstone outcrops at the edges of the Majors Creek watershed, where it was mined about 100 years ago. No effects on waters of Majors Creek have been reported.

4 Proposed post-reclamation use of portions of these quarries for recharge of winter runoff is an important opportunity that can lead to improved water quality and ground-water supply.

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-10 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

2.2.6 Recreation

Santa Cruz and its surroundings have served as a center of recreation for more than 150 years. In the San Lorenzo Valley, much of the recreation is focused on summer use of the streams and riparian corridors. Use of the San Lorenzo River and its tributaries includes swimming, canoeing, fishing, hiking, and equestrian activities. Visitor use – especially the traditional river-based water-contact recreation – is both a motivation for cleaner streams as well as a secondary contributor to bacteria, nitrate, and possibly turbidity levels.

The California Department of Parks and recreation manages about 15 percent of the watershed, including Henry Cowell (including Fall Creek), Castle Rock and portion of Big Basin Redwood State Parks. Few changes beyond trail repairs are anticipated during the next five years, according to Resource Ecologist Tim Hyland, except for additional use of controlled burning. Controlled burns are used as a vital tool to limit the multi-year persistent turbidity and sedimentation experienced locally following watershed-scale wildfires such as in 1923, and the 1948 Pine Mountain fire further west. City-operated recreation facilities at Loch Lomond will continue to emphasize boating, picnicking, and trail uses.

Recreational use of the Majors and Laguna Creek watersheds covered by the survey are diffuse and typical of rural residential areas, concentrated along the roads and trails. Significant portions of the southeastern side of the Majors Creek watershed are within the sectors of the Grey Whale Ranch and Wilder Ranch State Park that will likely remain closed to visitor use during the coming five years, according to Mr. Hyland.

Off road vehicles and mountain-bike use can be locally common. Trail (bike, horse, and hiker) and off-road vehicle use can be sources of erosion adding to background levels.

2.2.7 Reservoir sedimentation

Sedimentation rates in Loch Lomond are small relative to its capacity, perhaps because the watershed of the reservoir is maintained primarily in open space, and are not expected to constrain the water supply functions of the reservoir for many years to come. The City has commissioned three separate sedimentation surveys of Loch

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-11 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

Lomond by USGS, beginning in 1971 (Brown, 1973), with a subsequent 1982 survey by Fogelman and Johnson (1986). An additional 1998 sedimentation survey (McPherson and Harmon, 2000) showed an estimated 55 acre feet of sedimentation in the ‘upstream reach’ above cross-section 22, an area corresponding to the delta of Newell Creek and its western tributary. Results indicate an annual sedimentation rate of this portion of the reservoir below the reservoir spill elevation of about 0.41 acre feet per square mile, or about 660 cubic yards which is equivalent to about 700 tons per square mile based on the densities of sediment measured in this portion of the reservoir during 1971 by Brown (1973). The methods used are highly approximate, and do not include deltaic deposition above the reservoir spill elevation, or deposition elsewhere in the reservoir downstream from the upper reach. Based on these data and our experience with other California reservoirs, the rate of sedimentation in the reservoir is most likely about 1,000 to 1,400 tons per square mile for this 16-year period, one with a runoff history that might lead to somewhat higher-than-normal sedimentation rates. Using reasonable assumptions of sediment yields (Hecht and Enkeboll, 1980; Swanson and Dvorsky, 2001), it is likely that less than 2 percent of the reservoir capacity has been diminished by sedimentation since its gates were closed in the early 1960s.

No re-surveys were reported for other reservoirs in the study area as part of this sanitary survey update.

2.3 Natural Conditions and Water Quality

The San Lorenzo River watershed and the North Coast water supply drainages are located in north central Santa Cruz County, California. These watersheds drain runoff from the Santa Cruz Mountains into the Pacific Ocean at the north end of Monterey Bay (see Plate 1).

The Santa Cruz Mountains extend south to southwest for about 100 miles from San Francisco to the Pajaro River. The ridge of the Santa Cruz Mountains rises between San Francisco Bay and the Santa Clara Valley on the east and the Pacific Ocean on the west. The topography of the area is moderately rugged, with elevations ranging from sea level to over 2,600 feet along the crest of Ben Lomond Mountain, and over 3,300 feet at several locations along the northeastern edge of the watershed. Steep slopes of over 30 percent

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-12 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems are common, and most of the streams discussed in this report flow through deep canyons cut into bedrock. This is particularly true in the San Lorenzo River watershed, whose many streams are deeply shaded by a dense growth of redwood and Douglas fir.

The region has a Mediterranean climate with cool, dry summers and moderate-to-heavy rainfall in the winter months from November through March. Average annual rainfall ranges from about 25 inches along the coast to about 60 inches along the ridge of Ben Lomond Mountain. Coastal fog is common during the summer months and tends to spread inland at night.

The crest of Ben Lomond Mountain forms the topographic divide between the San Lorenzo River watershed to the east and the North Coast watersheds (Majors and Laguna Creeks) to the west.

Coastal terraces, in the North Coast drainages, are a mosaic of grasslands, oak woodlands, steep forested canyons, and chaparral. The lowest coastal terraces, downstream of the SCWD supply intakes, are used for pasture or are cultivated for brussel sprouts and other row crops. Agricultural activity along the coast does not extend into the watersheds of the supply intakes.

2.3.1 Soils and geology

The area is underlain by a complex mosaic of alluvial and terrace deposits of Quaternary age; mudstone, shales, and sandstones of tertiary age; and fractured granitic rocks, schists, and metamorphosed limestones. Soils are highly variable, with a dense mosaic, depending on the underlying parent materials, and other factors such as climate, aspect, vegetation cover, and local relief. Alluvial and terrace soils of varying ages have formed on the alluvial and terrace deposits along nearly all of the major streams. Some of these soils have well-developed clay subsoils, inhibiting use of leachfields.

In the most general terms, soils underlain by permeable sandstones, as well as igneous and metamorphic rocks, are deep and well-drained. These loamy and sandy loam soils are found throughout the heavily forested reaches of the survey area. Soils formed from the Santa Margarita and several other sandstone formations are also sandy, deep, and

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-13 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems well drained. In the sandy soils, organic-matter content and cation exchange capacities are often about 15 to 25 percent of those found in many forest soils in coastal California. Santa Cruz County has been developing approaches and technologies to control erosion in these soils, and to improve nitrogen and pathogen removal in discharges from septic systems. Soils formed from mudstones and shales also tend to be deep, yet somewhat less well-drained. Overall, soil depth is often limited by shallow bedrock, steep slopes and the gradual loss of topsoil to erosion.

In the alluvial areas of the San Lorenzo and North Coast watersheds, soils are also deep and well drained, although soil depth may be limited by low-permeability layers of fines. In the marine terraces of the North Coast, soils are characterized as deep to very deep and range from well-drained to somewhat poorly drained where claypans have developed in the old and illuviated soils. As in the San Lorenzo Valley, depths vary with slope and aspect.

Naturally-occurring cadmium occurs in portions of the Monterey shale and (to a much lesser extent) Santa Cruz mudstone geologic units. Because cadmium is tightly bound to minerals and clays in the local soils, elevated levels of cadmium are seldom if ever encountered in the water diverted from either the San Lorenzo River or North Coast watersheds. Higher levels are found in stream sediments and vegetation, and cadmium can be bioconcentrated by organisms living in the sediments and soils. The geochemistry of cadmium enrichment is described in Majmundar (1980). The distribution of cadmium in western Santa Cruz County is explained in Golling (1983). Zinc and other trace elements often co-occurring with cadmium are not reported to be elevated in the local soils and sediment derived from the Monterey formation. The same formations tend to be rich in phosphorus, which is widespread in the streams of all surveyed watersheds. With organic carbon also abundant, the ecosystems of these streams are nearly always nitrogen-limited (Aston and Ricker, 1976; Butler, 1978).

2.3.2 Faults and seismic activity

Faulting and seismicity pose a potential geologic hazard in the Santa Cruz Mountains. The San Andreas fault parallels the northern boundary of the project area approximately two miles to the north. Numerous faults cross the project area. In the San Lorenzo Valley, the most notable faults include: the Zayante fault, which runs primarily east-

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-14 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems west, crossing Loch Lomond; Ben Lomond fault, with a trace roughly paralleling the San Lorenzo River from Santa Cruz to the Boulder Creek area; and the Butano fault, which crosses the northern, highest portions of the San Lorenzo watershed. No recent movement has been recorded on any of the three faults.

The principal fault in the North Coast area is the San Gregorio fault zone, which trends north-northwestward several miles offshore from the mouths of Laguna and Majors Creeks. It is active and has sustained recurrent activity for several million years.

Santa Cruz County experiences low-level seismic activity on a regular basis. The most significant recent event was the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. Significant damage to structures, roadways, and utilities occurred, including damage to water systems. Landslides, debris flows, and the reconstruction of residences and infrastructure contributed to persistent turbidity in area streams and surface waters. Future seismic activity should be anticipated and this expectation should be a major factor in public policy and management of local water supplies.

2.3.3 Volcanic activity

While known for their seismic activity, the Santa Cruz Mountains are not likely to experience significant volcanic activity in the foreseeable future.

2.3.4 Vegetation

The watershed lands evaluated in this survey area are dominated by dense forests consisting of a mix of deciduous and evergreen trees and hardy shrubs. Second growth coast redwood is the dominant forest species in the steep canyons, particularly where coastal fog can supply summer moisture. Several species of oak, as well as Douglas fir, tanoak, and madrone form mixed stands on drier slopes and aspects. Some ridges are covered by dense chaparral, composed mainly of manzanita and chamise. Ponderosa pine, a forest species not generally found in the Coast Range, forms a distinct community in the locations where the coarse sands of the Santa Margarita formation are exposed.

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-15 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

While scattered grasslands can still be seen in the San Lorenzo River watershed, most have been converted to residential uses or have reverted to chaparral and second growth forests. The coastal terraces support larger grasslands, but are also subject to the same sorts of residential development pressures and conversion to chaparral and coastal scrub. Within the area grasslands, few native bunchgrasses are found, having long ago been replaced by the exotic annual grasses introduced by early European settlers.

Riparian plant communities are established along all streams in the surveyed watersheds, although human activity or debris from unstable slopes often encroaches in these areas. Several species of willow and alder, as well as big leaf maple, box elder, sycamore, and cottonwood are the most common tree species. California blackberry, poison oak, stinging nettle, in addition to numerous species of sedge and rush, make up much of the understory streambank vegetation. In disturbed riparian areas, non-native vegetation such as French broom, English or cape ivy, poison hemlock, periwinkle, and acacia have become established and compete with native species. These riparian zones are thought to play vital roles in protecting and maintaining water quality in most of the water supply watersheds.

2.3.5 Wildlife

Numerous wildlife species inhabit the California Coastal Ranges. The steep topography, extensive open space, and vegetation communities that range from aquatic and riparian to woodland and chaparral, provide a wide range of habitats for terrestrial and avian species. The area supports such mammalian species as: black-tail deer, mountain lion, bobcat, gray fox, California ground squirrel and a variety of other small terrestrial mammals. A number of non-native mammal species have become established in the Santa Cruz Mountains, including wild pig, Norway rat, common opossum, and feral domestic dogs and cats.

The number of bird species found in the Santa Cruz Mountains reflects the variety of habitats and the location along the Pacific Coast migratory route of waterfowl and songbirds. The riparian habitats fringing the San Lorenzo River and the smaller streams of the region have the highest breeding bird density of all habitat types in the area. Several species of wading birds live in the area, including great blue heron, green heron, and black crested night heron. Belted kingfishers, Stellar’s jays, and wood ducks are

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-16 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems also residents. Raptors are common throughout the area and include red-shouldered hawks, red-tailed hawks, and Coopers hawks, while occasionally golden eagles can also be encountered in the watershed. Reptile and amphibians are also abundant in local riparian habitats. Notable species include the western pond turtle, California red-legged frog, legless lizard, and several species of salamander.

The San Lorenzo River supports many species of fish. Steelhead trout and coho salmon are considered native to the coastal streams in Santa Cruz County and the San Lorenzo River supports the region's largest steelhead run. Once a hotbed for anglers, the San Lorenzo fisheries have suffered a decline, widely thought to result from sedimentation and other land-use effects. In 1964 the estimated run consisted of 20,000 steelhead (Ricker, 1979). Runs of 500 to 1,500 adult steelheads are more typical of current conditions. Coho salmon, with a historically smaller run, have also declined. Since 1981, coho have been intermittently observed in the San Lorenzo River, though local populations are on the verge of extirpation. Both steelhead and coho are federally listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, while coho are listed by the State under the more-critical ‘endangered’ designation. The primary threats to these species include: loss of high quality rearing and spawning habitats due to flow reductions and excessive fine sediment loads; and barriers to migration due to dams, culverts, and flow- depleted critical riffles (Alley and others, 2004).

2.4 Water Supply Systems Background 2.4.1 History

The San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds provide drinking water for numerous communities in the Santa Cruz area. Table 2-2 lists the water supply sources and general treatment processes used by the two purveyors participating in this sanitary survey update (SCWD and SLVWD). These purveyors use surface water and have over 200 total service connections. Table 2-3 lists the same information for non-participating purveyors many of which have less than 200 service connections. All the purveyors listed in Tables 2-2 and 2-3 use surface water in the San Lorenzo Valley Watershed. The following sections focus on the larger utilities, listed in Table 2-2, which include SCWD and SLVWD. The watershed areas for each participating utility and some non- participating utilities are shown on Plate 1.

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-17 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

2.4.2 Santa Cruz Water Department (SCWD)

Generally, the City of Santa Cruz began establishing water rights to area streams and underflow in the late 1800s. The riparian rights to the North Coast sources were purchased from downstream landowners. The City also has appropriative rights to San Lorenzo River water via licenses. These licenses allow the withdrawal of water at the Tait Street and Felton diversions. In 1960, Newell Creek Dam was constructed to create Loch Lomond Reservoir, with a then-reported capacity of 8,500 of acre-feet5. Jointly, these three surface water sources are the primary supply for the City.

Source water development and the supply history of the Santa Cruz Water Department through 1986 were described in detail in the 1996 sanitary survey. During that year, the City upgraded the Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant (WTP) to improve treatment performance. Improvements consisted of replacing the filter media; modifying the chemical feed systems, flocculators, monitoring and control system, and sludge collectors; and installing tube settlers in the sedimentation basins. Major developments in the SCWD water supply and treatment system that have occurred since the 2001 sanitary survey update include:

ƒ full implementation of a corrosion control program

ƒ replacement of filter media

ƒ installation of a new SCADA system

ƒ rebuilding of the Felton booster pump station

ƒ installation of a new standby engine generator

ƒ replacement of the Loch Lomond Reservoir hypolimnetic aerator with higher capacity facilities

ƒ restoration of Live Oak Well No. 7

ƒ rebuilding and expansion of University Pump Station No. 2 and installation of a standby engine generator.

5 Recent re-surveys by USGS using more precise technologies indicate a current capacity of 8,991 acre-feet above the spillway elevation (Chris Berry, personal communication, 2006).

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-18 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

2.4.3 San Lorenzo Valley Water District (SLVWD)

The SLVWD, originally the San Lorenzo Valley County Water District, was formed by a special election of the residents of Santa Cruz County on April 3, 1941. At that time the boundaries were established to include 58 square miles of the San Lorenzo Valley in the Santa Cruz Mountains. During the late 1940's, the SLVWD purchased large areas of land for watershed protection. In 1958 it sold 2,500 acres of land to the City of Santa Cruz for the placement of Loch Lomond Reservoir.

Major events in the development of the current SLVWD water supply system are described in detail in the 1996 sanitary survey. More recent developments include the annexation of the Mañana Woods Mutual Water Company and the acquisition of protected lands in the Malosky Creek watershed.

In March 2006, the SLVWD annexed the Mañana Woods Mutual Water Company water system serving 115 homes in the unincorporated Mañana Woods area south of Mt. Hermon Road in Scotts Valley. The annexation followed thirteen years of the mutual water company dealing with hydrocarbons in their well water; litigation with oil companies; and a March 2005 agreement between the mutual water company, the SLVWD, and the oil companies to pursue this annexation.

In the same year (2006), SLVWD acquired a 188-acre property in the Malosky Creek watershed which was traversed by the District’s five-mile transmission pipeline. The land was initially purchased by Sempervirens Fund in early 2006 from Mr. Roger Burch, owner of the timber company, Redwood Empire, and then sold to SLVWD. As part of the transaction, the SLVWD retired the timber rights for the property. The SLVWD has had a no-commercial logging policy on its watershed lands since the 1980s.

2.4.4 Lompico County Water District (LCWD)

The Lompico County Water District was first issued a permit to supply drinking water in 1966. LCWD obtained the water system from the Lompico Cooperative Water Association at that time. LCWD had approximately 500 service connections (as of 1996) within its service area, which generally surrounds the Lompico area. Lompico is shown just east of the Loch Lomond Reservoir in Plate 1.

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-19 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

Current activity includes the continued effort to develop safe water sources for LCWD, such as the purchase of the 425-acre Lompico headwaters property, which supplies water to the community of Lompico. As of this writing, Sempervirens Fund continues to raise funds for the acquisition of this property, and intends to transfer the purchased land to LCWD.

2.5 Water Sources 2.5.1 Santa Cruz Water Department

The existing SCWD water supply system is described in detail in planning reports and studies such as the 2003 City of Santa Cruz Integrated Water Plan and the 2000 and 2002 Water Supply Alternatives Studies. The SCWD supply system is comprised of four main production elements: (1) the North Coast streams and Liddell Spring; (2) the San Lorenzo River (Tait Street Diversion and Felton Diversion); (3) Loch Lomond on Newell Creek; and (4) the Live Oak wells. All but the Live Oak wells system, which are not included in this surface water sanitary survey, are described in the following paragraphs. The water supply facilities are shown on Plate 1.

2.5.2 North Coast

The North Coast water supply system consists of surface diversions from three coastal streams and one natural spring located approximately six to eight miles northwest of downtown Santa Cruz. These sources are Liddell Spring, Laguna Creek, its tributary Reggiardo Creek, and Majors Creek. There have been no major changes to the facilities described in the 1996 sanitary survey. A brief summary follows, for reference. More detailed descriptions are found in the 1996 sanitary survey.

Liddell Spring — Liddell Spring, developed in 1913, is a natural spring used for water supply. The spring box/diversion is located at elevation 584 feet. Water from the spring is directed through a 10-inch steel pipeline into the Coast Pipeline for transmission to the SCWD service area.

Laguna and Reggiardo Creeks — Flows from Reggiardo Creek are captured at a diversion dam located at elevation 630 feet. Diversions from Reggiardo Creek are diverted through about 850 feet of pipeline to Laguna Creek. Combined flows from

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-20 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

Laguna Creek and diversions from Reggiardo Creek are captured at a concrete and limestone dam located at elevation 623 feet on Laguna Creek. The original dam constructed in 1890 is still in use today. These diversions are sent through 12,400 linear feet of 14-inch steel pipeline to the junction with the transmission pipeline from Liddell Spring. The junction is known as the Laguna-Liddell "Y".

Majors Creek — Flow from Majors Creek is diverted from a concrete dam located at elevation 352 feet, which was built in the late 1800's. Diversions from Majors Creek are conveyed through 11,300 linear feet of pipeline varying between 10 and 16 inches in diameter before joining the main Coast Pipeline along Highway 1. Because the Majors Creek diversion is located at a much lower elevation than the other North Coast sources, use of the Majors Creek Diversion is limited by the hydraulic loading from the other North Coast sources (i.e. the Majors Creek flows can enter the Coast Pipeline only when the head from the other sources is low) .

Water from the North Coast diversions flows by gravity to the SCWD system via the Coast Pipeline, which varies from 16 inches in diameter between the Laguna-Liddell "Y" and Majors Creek up to 24 inches in diameter near Bay Street Reservoir.

Water from the Coast Pipeline is boosted at the 5-mgd Coast Pump Station to the Graham Hill WTP for treatment.

2.5.3 San Lorenzo River - Tait Street diversion

San Lorenzo River flows are diverted at the Tait Street Diversion just north of Highway 1. Water is diverted at a concrete check dam into a screened intake sump where three vertical turbine pumps with a total capacity of 7.8 mgd are used to pump the water to the Graham Hill WTP. These pumps are located in the same building as the pumps for the North Coast diversions.

The Tait Street Diversion also includes two wells, located on the east side of the river. Tait Well No. 1 is 92 feet deep and Tait Well No. 4 is 79 feet deep. Each of these wells can produce 0.6 mgd and both are tied to the City's appropriative rights for San Lorenzo River flows. The Tait wells are believed to be hydraulically connected to the river. The

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-21 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

DHS classifies water from the Tait wells as GWUDI (Ground Water Under Direct Influence of Surface Water).

Water produced by the Tait wells is also delivered to the San Lorenzo River intake sump. The ground water is then pumped into a common transmission pipeline used to convey water from both the North Coast and San Lorenzo River sources to the Graham Hill WTP for treatment.

2.5.4 San Lorenzo River - Felton Diversion

There have been no major changes or modifications to this system in the last five years. The Felton Diversion is located on the San Lorenzo River just downstream of the Zayante Creek confluence, which is approximately five river miles north of the Tait Street Diversion. The diversion structure consists of an inflatable rubber dam to divert flows into a screened intake sump. Flows are then pumped through the Felton Booster Station into Loch Lomond for storage via the Newell Creek Pipeline. The desired diversion rate is regulated by using different combinations of the three pumps at the Felton Diversion and the six pumps at the Felton Booster Station.

2.5.5 Loch Lomond on Newell Creek

The Loch Lomond Reservoir was created by the construction of Newell Creek Dam, located about ten miles north of Santa Cruz and northeast of the town of Ben Lomond. The reservoir was constructed in 1960, and currently stores about 9,000 acre feet.6 Loch Lomond is the only major reservoir in the San Lorenzo River watershed. There have been no major changes in this system in the last five years.

Newell Creek Dam is an earthfill dam, 190 feet high and 750 feet long at the crest. The spillway crest is at elevation 577 feet. Releases from the reservoir are made through outlet works on the upstream face of the dam. The lowest outlet is at elevation 470 feet. At maximum capacity, Loch Lomond covers an area of about 180 acres.

6 Per a recent USGS survey. Previous reports had cited the reservoir capacity as 8500 acre feet.

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-22 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

Water released from Loch Lomond for use by SCWD is conveyed to the Graham Hill WTP through the Newell Creek Pipeline. The water flows by gravity from the reservoir to the Felton Booster Station, approximately 4.3 miles downstream of the dam. The water is then pumped at Felton Booster Station to clear a ridge in Henry Cowell State Park at an elevation of about 580 feet. To meet fluctuating head and flow conditions, six pumps and alternative valving configurations are available at the Felton Booster Station.

2.5.6 SLVWD

Clear Creek, Foreman Creek, Peavine Creek, Silver Creek, and Sweetwater Creek are the primary surface water sources for the SLVWD. The current average stream diversion yearly total is about 900 acre-feet. SLVWD has appropriative rights to these creeks. These sources are perennial creeks and are located west of Highway 9 along the Ben Lomond Mountain. The watersheds of the creeks are contiguous and rugged with extremely steep slopes. The watersheds above the creek intakes are largely uninhabited. The approximate location of each creek intake and watershed area is illustrated in Plate 1.

2.5.7 Lompico County Water District

The LCWD was issued a permit in 1966 to serve drinking water. LCWD provides water to the Lompico area (Plate 1), which consists mostly of single-family homes through about 500 service connections. The surface water sources are Lompico and Mill Creeks. The estimated population for the service area is about 1,500 people. The average drinking water use is about 0.10 mgd, which is supplied by both surface and ground- water sources. In 1996, LCWD constructed a new water treatment plant, a microfiltration unit, to comply with SWTR requirements. LCWD sponsors a community creek clean-up event annually prior to the first flush event.

2.6 Water Rights 2.6.1 SCWD

Table 2-4 lists the SCWD water rights, which were found in the 2005 Urban Water Management Plan. There have been no changes in the SCWD water rights since the writing of the 1996 sanitary survey.

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-23 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

2.6.2 Other utilities

Table 2-5 summarizes the water rights for the larger utilities in the watershed area in the San Lorenzo Valley watershed. The large utilities have more than 200 service connections. The smaller utilities have less than 200 service connections and are monitored by the County Health Services Agency. This table also lists the limiting flow rates or diverted flow rates from the different surface waters, if applicable.

2.6.3 Water quantity

Table 2-6 summarizes the water sources and the quantity of water available for each large utility. This table lists the surface water sources for each utility, the approximate average surface water supply capacity for the source, the total supply capacity (including ground water), and the total average day use. Each of the large utilities has a limited supply of water for drinking water purposes. For example, SCWD has about 11.4 to 15.7 mgd of combined ground and surface water available for drinking water purposes, of which about 75 percent comes from flowing surface diversions. The average day use from 2000 to 2004 was about 9.9 mgd, with a potential average demand in 2030 of up to 14.6 mgd (2005 UWMP: Tables 4-1 and 4-3). Although average water demand appears to be met with the available supply, during periods of drought, flows in the San Lorenzo River and coast sources run low and cannot support average dry- season demands. This situation can stress the system, especially given the unpredictable nature of climate conditions. The 2004 study SCWD Adequacy of Municipal Water Supplies to Support Future Development in the City of Santa Cruz Service Area identified system limitations. SCWD will be challenged to consistently provide and achieve the desired supply capacity, especially during extended drought periods and in the future.

In an effort to maximize the volume of water available from surface water sources after a storm event, the minimum turbidity level for withdrawal from these sources was raised from 10 NTU to 25 NTU in the late 1990s.

2.6.4 Source management

Each of the utilities in the area manages their sources in an attempt to satisfy the water demands for their specific systems. All utilities are dependent upon the surface flows from the various creeks, streams, and springs that make up their drinking water source. Factors such as highly turbid water caused by stormwater runoff make the water more

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-24 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems difficult to treat, requiring diversion of the source to be discontinued until the water quality returns to acceptable levels. For example, SCWD does not use water from the Tait Street Diversion during storm events when the turbidity exceeds about 10 to 15 NTU. Also, SLVWD does not use highly turbid water at their Lyon WTP during high- turbidity periods.

One of the major issues facing SCWD in the next several years is the potential that in- stream flow requirements for Endangered Species Act (ESA) requirements will be established on some of the North Coast streams, potentially reducing the volume of flow available from these sources. The consequence of reduced North Coast flows would be higher reliance on water from Loch Lomond Reservoir, which has a higher total organic carbon (TOC) concentration, and hence a higher potential for formation of disinfection byproducts (DBP). City staff has started to discuss, at a conceptual level, the implications of ESA in-stream flow requirements, which could include modifying the treatment process and/or constructing horizontal wells at the San Lorenzo River diversion -- both of which are activities that will require many years to plan and implement. In addition, Graham Hill WTP improvements to meet LT2 and Stage 2 rule requirements have been evaluated and are planned to be on-line by the end of 2012. These improvements include alternatives that could be implemented to meet more stringent D/DBPR requirements and reduce the higher levels of DBP that are associated with elevated TOC concentrations.

Water utilities must therefore balance the need to satisfy their customer demand with the requirement to comply with drinking water regulations. Most utilities, large and small, experience difficulty in treating highly-turbid water, and therefore prepare and adjust for such operations before, during, and after storms events.

2.7 Facilities 2.7.1 Raw water reservoirs

With the exception of small diversions in creeks and streams, the only large raw water reservoir in this study area is Loch Lomond, which is managed by SCWD. This roughly 9,000 acre-foot capacity reservoir, located on Newell Creek northeast of Felton and east of Ben Lomond, is augmented by San Lorenzo River water diverted at the Felton

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-25 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

Diversion structure. As previously mentioned, the SLVWD is entitled to a portion of the capacity of this reservoir.

2.7.2 Intakes/conveyance systems

The locations of major water intakes are shown in Plate 1. Table 2-7 describes the intake and conveyance systems for the large utilities. Note that the San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast watersheds have extensive intake and conveyance systems needed to efficiently use the readily available supply of water in this area. Many of the intake structures have been constructed to prevent contamination from outside sources. Some of the key intake and conveyance systems are discussed below.

2.7.2.1 SCWD

Plate 1 shows approximate intake locations for the SCWD system. These include pipelines from the North Coast watershed and the San Lorenzo Valley. The details of these intakes and conveyance systems have been previously described in the 1996 sanitary survey.

2.7.2.2 SLVWD

Plate 1 shows the locations of the surface water sources used by the SLVWD. The Sweetwater Creek and Clear Creek intakes have been relocated further upstream on each creek to minimize the impact from human activity. However, this relocation has also moved the intakes closer to Empire Grade Road and reduced the runoff area. The impact of this relocation should be beneficial unless there is a significant chemical spill upstream of one or both intakes.

2.7.2.3 LCWD

The Lompico County Water District has intakes on Lompico Creek below the Mill Creek confluence. About 10 to 15 houses are located upstream of these intake structures. Two recorded episodes upstream of the system, a failed septic tank and a house fire, both documented in the 1996 sanitary survey, may have impacted the surface water source for LCWD. LCWD’s long-term plan includes relocating the creek intake structure upstream of existing houses.

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-26 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

2.7.3 Treatment plants/processes

The water treatment plant facilities for the large utilities in the watershed study areas are summarized in Table 2-8 and are described in more detail below.

2.7.3.1 SCWD

Figure 2-1 illustrates the water treatment processes used by SCWD at the Graham Hill WTP. The Graham Hill WTP is a conventional treatment plant with key processes such as preoxidation, coagulation, carbon/potassium permanganate contactors (for taste and odor control), flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, and disinfection. These processes are fully described in the latest Inspection Report by DHS.

The Loch Lomond Reservoir Recreational Area (LLRRA) water system uses a microfiltration system to provide water for park users and the caretakers of the reservoir watershed. This system produces about 15 gallons per minute (gpm) of reservoir water through a microfiltration unit, equivalent to about 20,000 gallons per day. The microfiltration membranes were last replaced in 2001.

SCWD also operates the Live Oak (previously Beltz) Wells Filtration Plant, which is an oxidation and pressure filtration process to remove ambient iron and manganese from a ground water source. The Live Oak well plant has dual-media filtration consisting of sand and anthracite coal on a gravel support layer and it operates at a rate of about 3 gallons per minute per square foot (gpm/ft2).

2.7.3.2 SLVWD

SLVWD constructed the Lyon WTP in 1994, a two-stage package filtration plant which uses floating media to remove floc particles followed by a granular media filtration. DHS accepted this process as equivalent to conventional treatment. The system consists of three prefabricated adsorption, clarification, and filtration units each rated at 420 gpm. Due to piping system constraints, however, the maximum treated water production rate is 1,150 gpm.

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-27 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

2.7.3.3 LCWD

LCWD constructed a new pressure filtration system with microfiltration facilities for the Lompico Creek WTP in 1996. This treats surface water from Lompico and Mill Creeks.

2.7.4 Pipeline data, capacity

Table 2-9 summarizes the pipeline data for each of the large utilities. Table 2-10 lists the distribution system reservoirs for each of the large utilities. The distribution system storage capacity for these utilities appears sufficient to account for short-duration periods when the lower quality water is diverted and water treatment facilities are not used. The maximum storage capacity for these utilities is about two to ten times more than the average daily use. Therefore, each utility has enough storage to allow a short- term period when water treatment facilities are not operational.

2.7.5 Satellite treatment facilities

Besides small chlorination systems for numerous wells used throughout the area, the main satellite treatment facilities are chlorination facilities used by SCWD at the University and Delaveaga Reservoirs. For each of these SCWD systems, chlorination equipment is housed in separate buildings or rooms from the source. SCADA systems are used to control and monitor these facilities. The targeted chlorine residual leaving these facilities to the appropriate pressure zones is about 0.5 mg/l of free chlorine.

2.8 Emergency Plans

Most utilities experience periodic emergencies that disrupt water treatment or water supply. The SWTR requires utilities to develop standard and emergency response plans for specific types of emergency episodes. These include chemical spills, fires, equipment failure, serious power failure, and deliberate water fouling. Some emergency plans may include responses to seismic episodes, floods, and droughts. In addition, the Bioterrorism Act, established after the attacks of September 11, 2001 (9-11), requires that drinking water systems serving a population greater than 3,300 (or 1,000 service connections) complete a vulnerability assessment in regard to terrorist activity and modify their emergency plans to reduce the risk posed by terrorist attacks. Most of the utilities in the study area have developed emergency response plans as part of the Operations Plans for each WTP. Also, the County has developed a program to notify

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-28 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems drinking water utilities of chemical spills, fires, and other emergencies in the watershed. This plan includes a response when episodes are notified via the 911 emergency telephone number. Specific emergency plans for each utility are discussed below.

2.8.1 SCWD

The SCWD developed a General Emergency Plan in June 2005, which addresses natural disasters such as earthquakes, tidal waves, flood, fire, vandal-caused disasters, and chemical spills. This General Emergency Plan would be used in the event of contamination of the water supply by acts of terrorism or vandalism. The response to equipment failures and serious power failures at the WTP is included in the December 2005 Plant Operations Manual.

SCWD has conducted a seismic risk evaluation called the Earthquake Response Procedures for the Newell Creek Dam and Other Critical Structures. This information is available in the 2005 General Emergency Plan. SCWD also has a Drought Contingency Plan (included in the 2005 Urban Water Management Plan) and a Drought Emergency Ordinance (currently being updated). Generally, both of these documents call for an aggressive conservation effort and public relations program to reduce the drinking water demand of the customers during emergencies.

The broader 2005 Draft Santa Cruz County Operational Area7 Emergency Management Plan addresses the consequences of any emergency or disaster which may occur within the County. The plan also provides a means by which State and Federal assistance is requested if necessary. Depending on the size and complexity of the incident, an emergency operations center (EOC) may be activated under the direction of the Santa Cruz County Office of Emergency Services. By fiscal year 2007, the Santa Cruz Operational Area will transition to a Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) that is compliant with the National Incident Management System (NIMS). NIMS was developed by the Department of Homeland Security to improve national readiness to respond to not only terrorist events but all types of disasters (Santa Cruz County Office of Emergency Services, 2005).

7 The Santa Cruz Operational Area consists of the County and all political subdivisions within the County.

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-29 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 2 Sanitary Survey Watersheds and Water Supply Systems

2.8.2 SLVWD

SLVWD lists most of their emergency response plans in the Lyon WTP Operations Plan. This plan includes a response to most natural disasters and chemical spills in the watershed. For other emergencies, SLVWD can rely on the County EOC infrastructure.

2.8.3 LCWD

LCWD responds to emergency plans such as natural, accidental, and vandal-caused disasters as per their documented Emergency Response Plan. This includes the specific responses, disinfection, and notification for these types of disasters. Generally, the LCWD will shut off the water supply that has been possibly contaminated and use the alternative supply if necessary.

For chemical spills, Zayante Fire Protection District personnel are required to notify LCWD through established County communications for any disaster that was caused upstream of the Lompico Creek intake structure. For fires, the LCWD has established fire breaks around all treated water reservoir sites.

For equipment failures or extended power outages, the LCWD stocks a surplus of spare pipe fittings, pipe, replacement motors, belts, and chemicals to keep the system operational. The LCWD also has a trailer-mounted emergency generator that will provide 30 kilowatts power. The two WTPs (1 surface, 1 ground-water system) and booster stations are outfitted with quick-disconnect emergency-hookup switches. The LCWD also has smaller generators to provide power for office and radio operations.

To plan for earthquakes in the area, five of the six water storage tanks have been rehabilitated with restraint hold-downs and flexible fittings to minimize any lateral movement. All LCWD structures have been evaluated for seismic risk.

Finally, the LCWD has a Drought Contingency Plan, which calls for public education to conserve water and a tiered rate structure for the drinking water.

Section 2 03-20-07.doc 2-30 Table 2-1 Watershed Areas and Drinking Water Purveyors Served (1)

Watershed Area Utilities Served Watershed Area

Acres Square Miles

San Lorenzo River Valley (upstream of SCWD, SLVWD, Cal-Am (Citizens), 74,000 115 the SCWD Tait Street Diversion) LCWD, Big Basin Water Company (2)

Subwatersheds

Loch Lomond Reservoir SCWD and SLVWD 5,300 8.3

Fall Creek Cal-Am (formerly Citizens) 2,600 4.1

Lompico and Mill Creeks LCWD 1,470 2.3

Sweetwater Creek SLVWD 180 0.3

Clear Creek SLVWD 460 0.7

Malosky Creek SLVWD 25 0.04

Harmon Creek SLVWD 60 0.1

Foreman Creek SLVWD 500 0.8

Silver Creek SLVWD 20 0.03

Peavine Creek SLVWD 230 0.4

North Coast Watersheds

Liddell Spring SCWD 1,200(3) 0.1

Laguna Creek SCWD 3,300 5.2

Majors Creek SCWD 2,500 3.9

(1) Plate 1 shows the study area primary watersheds and subwatersheds within the San Lorenzo River valley, the North Coast watersheds, and the general locations for each utility.

(2) Numerous other drinking water purveyors with less than 200 service connections use surface water from this watershed.

(3) The surface watershed at Liddell Spring is 1,200 acres, the total drainage area including subsurface karst is approximately 2,000 acres (P.E. LaMoreaux & Associates, 2005a).

206081 Table 2.1 Watershed Areas 03-20-07.xls; Table 2-1 Table 2-2 Summary of Drinking Water Purveyors Serving Surface Water With More Than 200 Service Connections in the Study Area

Utility Name and Number of Last DHS Service Surface Water Treatment Average Annual Primary Inspection Connections Sources Process Flow Disinfectant Report Santa Cruz Water San Lorenzo Conventional 9.9 mgd Chlorine Feb-06 Department (City of River/Loch Lomond Filtration at the Santa Cruz) Reservoir and Graham Hill WTP North Coast Springs & Creeks

21,694 Service (2001 - 2004 Connections Average Annual) San Lorenzo Valley Clear Creek, Package WTP 1.9 mgd Chlorine Feb-06 Water District Foreman Creek, (Trident Microfloc) (includes use of Peavine Creek, 1 mgd WTP groundwater Silver Creek, w/Conventional sources) Sweetwater Creek; Treatment and Two Springs Equivalency

5,945 Service (2001 - 2005 Connections Average Production) Lompico County Lompico Creek Microfiltration Plant 0.08 mgd (1993 Chlorine data not provided Water District below Mill Creek data)

497 Service Connections

Note to Reviewers : Cal-Am (formerly Citizens) and Big Basin MWC participated in the 1996 sanitary survey and are included in Table 2-3.

Tables 2-2 to 2-10 03-09-07.xls; Table 2-2n Table 2-3 Summary of Small and Non-Participating Drinking Water Purveyors in the San Lorenzo River Watershed

Watershed Number of Filtration Disinfection Name Location Connections System/Type Strategy Other Comment s

California- Fall Creek. Some 1387 In-line Pressure Chlorine -- American flow from Bull Filter (sand media Springs and only) - New WTP Bennett Spring Planned for 1996 (Trident Microfloc Processes

Big Basin Water Four surface 551 Jamison WTP; Chlorine -- Company sources; Jamison Conventional Springs (No. 1 Processes with and 2), Corvin Capacity to Treat Springs, Well No. 150 gpm (Neptune 5 (horizontal Microfloc/ Trimite) under the influence of surface water)

Brackenbrae North of Boulder 27 Package WTP (3M Chlorine Protected streams Mutual Water Creek bag filter) and spring Company(1)

Forest Springs North of Boulder 130 Sedimentation only Chlorine Spring source Mutual Water Creek Company(1)

Bonnymede On Reggiardo 10 -- Ozone -- Mutual Water Creek Company(1)

Olympia Mutual n/a n/a (<200) Filtration Chlorine Annexation with Water SLVWD in progress Company(1)

Quaker Center Near Ben Lomond Non- Package WTP (3M Chlorine -- Community bag filter) System (<200)

River Grove Near Felton 23 Slow sand filtration Chlorine -- Water System(1)

Data source: 1996 Sanitary Survey n/a = Information is not applicable for this project. See Plate 1 for utility locations. (1) Small water companies represented by Santa Cruz County

Tables 2-2 to 2-10 03-09-07.xls; Table 2-3n Table 2-4 Summary of SCWD Water Rights

Source Period Maximum Fish Flow Annual

Diversion Limit Diversion Requirement (mg/year) Rate (cfs) (cfs)

North Coast (1) Year-round No limit None None

San Lorenzo River Tait Street Diversion and Wells Year-round 12.2 None None

Felton Diversion to Loch September 7.8 10 977 Lomond Reservoir October 20 25 977 November-May 20 20 June-August ------

Loch Lomond Reservoir on Newell Creek Collection September-June No limit --- 1,825 Withdrawal Year-round --- 1 1,042

(1) Water rights for the North Coast Sources are pre-1914 rights containing all downstream rights. Therefore, the SCWD may divert up to the full natural flow of each stream.

Tables 2-2 to 2-10 03-09-07.xls; Table 2-4n Table 2-5 Summary of Surface Water Rights for Utilities With More Than 200 Service Connections

Utility Source(s) Rights Limitations

Santa Cruz Water Tait Street Diversion Year-round use; no fish 12.2 cfs (7.9 mgd) Department (SCWD) and Wells flow requirements or maximum withdrawals per annual flow limitations day.

Felton Diversion Can divert 20 cfs (12.9 Must provide at least 25 cfs mgd) from October in October and 20 cfs from through May to Loch November through May for Lomond fish flows. Maximum allowable diversion is 977 per year. Loch Lomond Reservoir Can withdraw year- Nominal fish flow into round Newell Creek (1 cfs)

Coast sources Fully appropriated None rights

San Lorenzo Valley Clear Creek, Foreman Fully appropriated None Water District (SLVWD) Creek, Harmon Creek, rights Peavine Creek, Sweetwater Creek, Malosky Creek

Lompico County Water Lompico Creek SWRCB (appropriated) Minimum release of 0.1 cfs District (LCWD) Allowable withdrawal = at all times. 24 mgd

Source: DHS Annual Inspection Reports

Note to Reviewers : Info for Cal-Am (formerly Citizens) and Big Basin MWC are not included in this table but were included in the 1996 survey.

Tables 2-2 to 2-10 03-09-07.xls; Table 2-5n Table 2-6 Summary of Water Sources Available for Utilities With More Than 200 Service Connections

Maximum Approx. Groundwater Total Average Surface Supply Total Supply Average Water Supply Capacity Rate Capacity Day Use Utility Source(s) Capacity (mgd) (mgd) (mgd) (mgd) Notes City of Santa Tait Street 5.5 to 7.0 N/A Cruz Water Division Dept.

Tait Street 1.2 N/A Wells(1) 9.9 (2001 - Total supply 11.4 to 15.7 2004 Average capacity depends Loch Lomond 1.1 N/A Annual) on annual rainfall Reservoir

Coast Sources 2.7 to 5.5

Beltz Wells(2) N/A 0.9 (Active wells only)

San Lorenzo Clear Creek, 1.2 N/A Valley Water Foreman Creek, District Silver Creek, Peavine Creek, Sweetwater Most of the demand Creek is in surface water 4.5 1.6 service area (about Quail Hollow N/A 3.3 70 percent) Wells, Olympia Wells, Pasatiempo Wells Lompico County Lompico and Mill 0.06 N/A Water District Creeks 0.12 0.082 Well Sources (4 N/A 0.06 wells)

Source: Latest DHS Inspection Reports

N/A - Not applicable

(1) Tait Street wells are considered a surface water because they are hydraulically influenced by the San Lorenzo River flow. (2) This source is not in the subject watershed areas but is provided for completeness.

Note to Reviewers : Info for Cal-Am (formerly Citizens) and Big Basin MWC are not included in this table but were included in the 1996 survey.

Tables 2-2 to 2-10 03-09-07.xls; Table 2-6n Table 2-7 Summary of Conveyance/Intake Facilities for Utilities With More Than 200 Service Connections

Pipeline Pump Station Utility Source Intake Details Dimensions Capacity Other

City of Santa San Lorenzo River - Tait Combination concrete Varies N/A Cruz Water Street diversion check dam and screened Department intake sump with vertical turbine pumps on wells

San Lorenzo River - Inflatable rubber dam, N/A N/A Diverts water to Felton diversion screened intake pump Loch Lomond

Loch Lomond Reservoir Large earthen dam with 44,000 lf Gravity flow Used only specific multi-stage outlet tower pipeline; 18 to months to augment 27 inches supply diameter

Coast sources These sources have Diameter varies - N/A Gravity flow to the small diversion structures total pipelines City; pumped to or a protected spring box GHWTP

San Lorenzo Clear Creek N/A N/A Valley Water District

Sweetwater Creek Elev. 1230 ft. 1300 ft to South N/A Res.

Peavine Creek Elev 1264 ft. 8 in. pipeline to Gravity Tree farm in Foreman Creek watershed

Foreman Creek Elev 927 ft. 8 in. pipeline to Gravity Subdivision in WTP headwaters

Lompico Lompico Creek Secured, screened N/A N/A County Water structure adjacent to District creek impoundment dam with concrete deep well & 1 HP lift pump

N/A Not applicable or available.

Note to Reviewers : Info for California-Am (formerly Citizens) and Big Basin MWC are not included in this table but were included in 1996.

Tables 2-2 to 2-10 03-09-07.xls; Table 2-7n Table 2-8 Summary of Surface Water Treatment Facilities for Utilities With More Than 200 Service Connections

Subject Coagulant/ Utility/Treatment Watershed Pretreatment Flocculation Filtration Plant (Capacity) Source(s) Process Process Sedimentation (Rate) Disinfection Santa Cruz Water San Lorenzo Potassium Alum and Conventional - Dual media Chlorine/Chloramine Dept. Graham Hill River and North permanganate or cationic polymer enhanced using (4 gpm/ft2) WTP (1) Coast sources chlorine for Horizontal tube settlers oxidation, powdered paddle mixers activated carbon for taste and odor removal

(24 mgd)

San Lorenzo Valley Clear Creek, N/A Adsorption Adsorption onto Unknown Chlorine Water District Foreman Creek, clarification/ floating media WTP Harmon Creek, filtration which is equivalent Malosky Creek, (Neptune Trident to sedimentation Peavine Creek, Microfloc) Sweetwater Creek

(1.0 mgd) Lompico County Lompico Creek Chlorine gas Nalco 8102 None Pressure Chlorine gas Water District Mill polymer (12.5%) dual media WTP (3 gpm/sf) (0.12 mgd)

Source: DHS Annual Inspection Reports N/A = Not applicable (1) Beltz WTP is not included because it is a groundwater source and Loch Lomond Recreation Area WTP is not included because of its small size (Note: if City staff would like to include info on Beltz and LLRA in the table, please provide the info)

Note to Reviewers : Info for California-Am (formerly Citizens) and Big Basin MWC are not included in this table but were included in 1996.

Tables 2-2 to 2-10 03-09-07.xls; Table 2-8n Table 2-9 Summary of Distribution Systems for Utilities With More Than 200 Service Connections

Number of Service Utility Connections Total Pipeline Notes Length

City of Santa Cruz Water 21,646 in 11 pressure 300 miles Satellite disinfection Department zones available at 3 locations (4 in. to 18 in.)

San Lorenzo Valley Water 5,516 in 23 pressure Total linear feet unknown District zones (2 in. to 16 in.)

Lompico County Water 497 in 3 pressure zones Total linear feet unknown Complaints mostly low District pressure or leaks, not water quality-related (2 to 6 inch diameter)

Note to Reviewers : Info for California-Am (formerly Citizens) and Big Basin MWC are not included in this table but were included in 1996.

Tables 2-2 to 2-10 03-09-07.xls; Table 2-9n Table 2-10 Summary of Distribution System Storage Reservoirs for Utilities with more than 200 Service Connections

Utility Reservoir Name Type Capacity (MG) Notes Carbonera 1,000,000 University #5 2,000,000 University #4 400,000 University #2 1,000,000 Bay St. 34,000,000 DeLaveaga 1 1,000,000 City of Santa Cruz DeLaveaga 2 1,000,000 Water Department (15 S.C Gardens 1 250,000 reservoirs total) S.C Gardens 2 250,000 Rollingwoods 270,000 Pasatiempo 1 750,000 Pasatiempo 2 300,000 Unknown name Unknown name Unknown name

Echo 1,000,000 Reader 150,000 Brookdale 750,000 Big Steel 1,400,000 Lyon 3,000,000 Little Lyon 250,000 Blue Ridge 40,000 Huckleberry 125,000 Bear Creek Estates 75,000 Ralston 10,000 Eckley 4,000 Blackstone 1 11,000 Blackstone 2 11,000 Highland 60,000 Nina 1 64,500 San Lorenzo Valley Nina 2 64,500 Water District (32 reservoirs total) South 1 9,000 South 2 9,000 South 3 9,000 South 4 9,000 Spring 65,000 Swim 1 10,000 Total linear feet unknown Swim 2 10,000 (2 to 6 inch diameter) Quail 1 211,000 Quail 2 240,000 University 51,000 Reagon 500 Probation 100,000 Lower Pasatiempo 100,000 Upper Pasatiempo 100,000 Blue Tank 65,000 Charlie Tank 45,000

Note to Reviewers : Info for California-Am (formerly Citizens) and Big Basin MWC are not included in this table but were included in 1996. Lompico did participate in this sanitary survey update but did not provide information for this table.

Tables 2-2 to 2-10 03-09-07.xls; Table 2-10 Washwater Clarifiers

Source: CDM - Camp Dresser & McKee Inc., 1996

Figure 2-1 Process Layout of the Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant, Santa Cruz Water Department.

206081 Figure 2-1 3-8-07.xls, Figure 2-1 ©2007 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

TABLE OF CONTENTS 3. POTENTIAL CONTAMINANT SOURCES IN THE WATERSHEDS...... 1

3.1 SURVEY METHODS ...... 1 3.2 WASTEWATER ...... 1 3.2.1 Contaminants of concern...... 2 3.2.2 Existing conditions...... 4 3.2.2.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed...... 4 3.2.2.2 Bacteria ...... 8 3.2.2.3 Nitrate...... 9 3.2.2.4 Loch Lomond Reservoir subwatershed ...... 9 3.2.2.5 North Coast Watersheds ...... 10 3.2.3 Significance ...... 11 3.3 URBAN RUNOFF ...... 11 3.3.1 Contaminants of concern...... 11 3.3.2 Existing conditions...... 12 3.3.2.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed...... 14 3.3.2.2 Loch Lomond Reservoir and the upper Newell Creek watershed...... 17 3.3.2.3 North Coast Watersheds ...... 17 3.3.3 Significance ...... 17 3.4 AGRICULTURAL LAND USE ...... 18 3.4.1 Contaminants of concern...... 18 3.4.2 Existing conditions...... 19 3.4.2.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed...... 19 3.4.2.2 Loch Lomond Reservoir subwatershed ...... 20 3.4.2.3 North Coast Watersheds ...... 20 3.4.3 Significance ...... 20 3.5 GRAZING LIVESTOCK...... 21 3.5.1 Contaminants of concern...... 21 3.5.2 San Lorenzo Valley...... 22 3.5.3 Lock Lomond Reservoir and upper Newell Creek watershed...... 22 3.5.4 North Coast Watersheds...... 22 3.5.5 Significance ...... 23 3.6 CONCENTRATED ANIMAL FACILITIES...... 23 3.6.1 Contaminants of concern...... 23 3.6.2 San Lorenzo Watershed ...... 24 3.6.3 Loch Lomond Reservoir subwatershed...... 25 3.6.4 North Coast Watersheds...... 25 3.6.5 Significance ...... 25 3.7 PESTICIDE AND HERBICIDE USE ...... 26 3.7.1 Contaminants of concern...... 27 3.7.2 Existing conditions...... 27 3.7.2.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed...... 27 3.7.2.2 Loch Lomond Reservoir and upper Newell Creek watershed...... 30 3.7.2.3 North Coast Watersheds ...... 30 3.7.3 Significance ...... 30 3.8 WILDLIFE...... 31 3.8.1 Contaminants of concern...... 31 3.8.2 San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds...... 31 3.8.3 Significance ...... 32 3.9 QUARRIES/MINE RUNOFF ...... 32 3.9.1 Contaminants of concern...... 33

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-i Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

3.9.2 Existing conditions...... 33 3.9.2.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed...... 33 3.9.2.2 Loch Lomond Reservoir and the upper Newell Creek watershed...... 36 3.9.2.3 North Coast Watersheds ...... 36 3.9.3 Significance ...... 38 3.10 SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES...... 38 3.10.1 Contaminants of concern...... 39 3.10.2 Existing conditions...... 39 3.10.2.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed...... 39 3.10.2.1 North Coast Watersheds and the Loch Lomond Reservoir...... 41 3.10.3 Significance...... 41 3.11 TIMBER HARVESTS/LOGGING...... 42 3.11.1 Contaminants of concern...... 42 3.11.2 Existing conditions...... 43 3.11.3 Significance...... 46 3.12 RECREATION ...... 48 3.12.1 Contaminants of concern...... 48 3.12.2 Existing conditions...... 48 3.12.2.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed...... 48 3.12.2.2 Loch Lomond Reservoir and the upper Newell Creek watershed...... 50 3.12.2.3 North Coast Watersheds ...... 50 3.12.3 Significance...... 50 3.13 UNAUTHORIZED ACTIVITY...... 50 3.13.1 Contaminants of concern...... 51 3.13.2 San Lorenzo River Watershed ...... 51 3.13.3 Loch Lomond Reservoir subwatershed...... 52 3.13.4 North Coast Watersheds...... 52 3.13.5 Significance...... 53 3.14 VEHICLE UPSETS AND SPILLS ...... 53 3.14.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed ...... 54 3.14.1.1 Valeteria Dry Cleaners (6539 Highway 9)...... 54 3.14.1.2 Chevron Underground Storage Tank Leak (6325 Highway 9) ...... 54 3.14.1.3 Sturdy Oil (former Exxon Station) Storage Tank Leak(s) (6225 Graham Hill Road)...... 55 3.14.1.4 Other sites with potential plumes...... 55 3.14.2 Other watersheds ...... 56 3.14.3 Significance...... 56 3.15 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS...... 56 3.15.1 Seismic events...... 56 3.15.2 Significance...... 57 3.15.3 Landslides and other major slope instabilities ...... 57 3.15.4 Weather-related events...... 58 3.15.5 Significance...... 58 3.16 FIRES...... 59 3.16.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed ...... 59 3.16.2 Loch Lomond Reservoir and the upper Newell Creek watershed ...... 60 3.16.3 North Coast Watersheds...... 60 3.16.4 Significance...... 60

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3-1 Santa Cruz Watershed Sanitary Survey Contacts

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-ii Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

3. POTENTIAL CONTAMINANT SOURCES IN THE WATERSHEDS

3.1 Survey Methods

Field work within the San Lorenzo and North Coast watersheds was conducted on various dates during the latter half of 2006. Additional field measurements made during stream gaging, watershed surveys, and sediment sampling by Balance staff have been drawn upon for this analysis. The field survey consisted of a combination of a windshield surveys, discussions and site visits with several County staff and Water Department staff, update calls to selected agencies, and a review of several agency files. Contacts are listed in Table 3.1. The field survey work was also supplemented with additional data and report review and discussions with various agency staff. This section discusses the specific potential contaminant sources.

3.2 Wastewater

A number of communities and organizations are served by package wastewater treatment systems that discharge to common leachfields. These entities include: County Service Area No. 7 in the vicinity of the Boulder Creek Golf and Country Club, Bear Creek Estates, the Mt. Hermon Association, the San Lorenzo Valley Unified School District, Rollingwood, Camp Harmon, Camp Campbell and several other camps and conference centers. The great majority of the residences and businesses in the San Lorenzo River watershed are on individual or community (e.g., trailer parks) septic systems. As the San Lorenzo Valley has shifted from a primarily second-home area to a year-round residential community, homes have been remodeled and expanded but improvements to the old sub-standard septic systems often lagged far behind improvements to the homes. The dispersed rural population in the North Coast watersheds is served by individual septic tank and leachfield systems. There are no direct discharges of municipal wastewater to surface waters in the San Lorenzo Valley or North Coast watersheds.1

Septic systems have the potential to contaminate surface water either by percolation of wastewater through the soil into ground water which recharges surface water, or by direct surface runoff. If septic systems are improperly designed or installed in highly-

1 Releases from a granular activated carbon filtration plant for solvent removal at the Watkins Johnson site, which appears to be functioning well, is discussed below.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-1 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds permeable soils, wastewater constituents can leach into ground water and from there seep into nearby surface waters. Surface water contamination from septic systems can also occur by system ‘failure’, or insufficient percolation rates leading to ponding and surfacing of effluent. A ‘failing’ septic system can allow large amounts of nutrients, viruses and bacteria to contaminate nearby surface waters. The San Lorenzo Valley is somewhat unusual in that contaminants are introduced from the individual septic systems more extensively through excessively rapid percolation to ground water rather than by system failures.

Surface water contamination by nutrients and coliform bacteria from septic systems in the San Lorenzo Valley has been intensively studied. The 1979 Watershed Management Plan identified improperly functioning septic systems as one of the major pollutants sources to the San Lorenzo River. In 1995, the County Board of Supervisors and the Regional Board adopted the Wastewater Management Plan for the San Lorenzo River Watershed. This plan contains management practices to prevent further degradation of water quality from septic systems and corrective measures to improve existing systems and reduce the loading of pollutants to the San Lorenzo River. Many of these measures were emplaced after extended field trials at sites throughout the valley under a range of soil and slope conditions. The 1999-2001 program status report indicates a total of at least 3,000 systems were upgraded between 1986 and 2001; wet season septic failure rates of 5 to 14% have subsequently declined to 1 to 3% (Santa Cruz County, 2003). More than 11,700 parcels have been inspected and data on inspection results, pumping history, septic system characteristics and site conditions for 12,500 of the septic systems have been entered into the data base. Approximately 300 alternative on-site disposal systems with enhanced treatment capabilities have been installed on parcels unsuited for conventional systems. An updated program status report is anticipated during 2007 (John Ricker, personal communication, 2007), in which (among other refinements) the County’s experience with advanced on-site waste-treatment technologies will be considered.

3.2.1 Contaminants of concern

Contaminants in wastewater can be divided into those that present an acute health risk and those that may pose a chronic, or long-term health risk. An acute health risk is posed by the presence of pathogenic microorganisms. A chronic health risk is posed by

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-2 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds excessive concentrations of compounds present in the source water or formed in the water treatment process.

Wastewater contains a number of pathogenic microorganisms responsible for causing diseases, such as hepatitis, typhoid, cholera, dysentery, salmonella, giardiasis, and cryptosporidiosis. In a properly functioning septic system, the effluent is treated by the soil and the microorganisms are removed. If the system is not functioning properly, incompletely treated effluent may enter streams, or reach ground water.

Wastewater also contains high concentrations of nutrients and organic carbon. Most nitrogen in wastewater is converted to the nitrate form, which is highly soluble and readily transmitted through the soil to ground or surface waters. Nutrients can stimulate biological productivity in surface waters leading to high concentrations of organic carbon at downstream water intakes. Organic carbon combined with disinfectants used at water treatment plants produces trihalomethanes (THMs) and other disinfection byproducts (DBP) which can have long-term health implications. Excessive algal growth, promoted by introducing additional nitrate into a natural system in which phosphorus is widely available, also causes taste and odor problems in drinking water systems.

Blooms of blue-green algae (cyanobacteria), which form in nutrient-rich, non-turbulent waters, could cause more serious problems as some of these organisms produce harmful toxins. The EPA has added cyanobacteria to its Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List which prioritizes this issue for further investigation. Usually, management practices to control taste and odor help to reduce the likelihood of toxic blue-green algal blooms; however, prevention is the preferred method because some types of treatment can rupture the cells and release the toxins.

Greywater consists of wastewater not originating from the toilet. A greywater system collects and disposes of wastewater from systems such as the washing machine, shower, and bathroom sink. Greywater sumps are used by some homeowners to reduce loadings on a septic system with inadequate leaching capacity. Although greywater contains fewer pathogens, solids, and nutrients than toilet wastes, it can still present a significant health hazard. According to the County Health Services Agency, bacterial concentrations in greywater from shower or bath water can reach 400,000 fecal

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-3 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds coliforms/100 milliliter (ml) and 3 million total coliforms/100 ml. Washing machine wastewater can range from 2,000 to 10 million fecal coliforms/100 ml. In addition, there are roughly 200 enteric virus/Liter (L) of undisinfected greywater from showers and baths and 3,000 viruses/L from washing machines. County policy requires connection of all greywater to an adequately sized septic system but probably allows installation of at least 25 to 50 greywater sumps each year under appropriate conditions (Ricker, 1995).

3.2.2 Existing conditions 3.2.2.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed

The Regional Water Quality Control Board is responsible for permitting and management of wastewater systems that discharge greater than 2,500 gallons per day (gpd), although the County is currently operating under a draft memorandum of understanding which raises this threshold to 20,000 gpd. The County-operated Boulder Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant serves the neighboring country club, 18-hole golf course, tennis facilities, restaurant and pro shop, as well as about 200 townhouses and residences built along the fairways. The collection system includes 24 miles of 6- and 8- inch gravity mains, a 4-inch PVC force main, and five lift stations. The plant was upgraded to tertiary treatment in 1996 and has a capacity of 104,000 gpd. The treated effluent is pumped to a leachfield, where it is disposed of by subsurface discharge. In the past, tertiary treated water has also been delivered to the Boulder Creek Golf and Country Club, blended with raw water and used for irrigation. On several occasions in recent years, the force mains between the treatment plant and leachfield have experienced failures resulting in spills to Boulder Creek. In an effort to eliminate spills, the County is in the process of evaluating causes of and solutions to the failures.

The Bear Creek Estates Wastewater Treatment Plant, which is owned and operated by the SLVWD, serves units 3, 4, and 5 of Bear Creek Estates. SLVWD has a waste discharge permit to treat up to 12,000 gallons per day of wastewater, then discharge it to a community leachfield. In 2005, SLVWD installed improvements for nitrogen removal pursuant to the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s minimum discharge requirement of 50 percent nitrogen removal, prior to subsurface disposal.

Rollingwood and the Mt. Hermon Association are the two other significant community wastewater disposal systems in the watershed. The Rollingwood subdivision, near Santa Cruz, comprises about 30 homes. The Mt. Hermon Association is served by a

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-4 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds sequential batch reactor package plant that treats wastewater from a hotel, cabins and homes. The plant has a permitted capacity of 63,000 gpd but is currently operating at about 45,000 gpd (Mike Higgins, Regional Board, personal communication). Treated effluent is pumped uphill and discharged to a community leachfield above the plant.

Significant institutional wastewater disposal systems in the San Lorenzo Valley include those serving Camp Harmon, Camp Campbell and other organized camps, as well as the San Lorenzo Valley Unified School District (high school, junior high school, elementary school) facility in Felton. The latter system is unique in that treated effluent is further polished in a constructed wetland prior to being discharged to a leachfield.

There are also approximately 13,500 individual septic systems in the San Lorenzo watershed and the density of systems is higher than that of any other comparable area in California. watershed. Overall, the density of development in the creek bottoms, both along the river itself and on the river’s tributaries, is quite high. Many residences were originally used as summer homes and are now occupied year-round. Some homes were built with part of the building supported by stilts, over the floodplain. In many areas the density is akin to urban areas in California which are served by municipal sewer systems.

There are a number of limitations to on-site disposal systems in the San Lorenzo Valley watershed, as described in the 1995 Wastewater Management Plan:

ƒ Approximately 55 percent of the developed parcels are less than 15,000 square feet and 11 percent are less than 6,000 square feet. This significantly limits the size of leachfields and the opportunity to install back- up/replacement leachfields.

ƒ Two-thirds of the systems are substandard in size and do not meet the current repair standards.

ƒ About 40 percent of the systems were constructed before 1975 and have not experienced significant additions or do not have second leachfields.

ƒ About 14 percent of the systems are located less than 100 feet from a stream.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-5 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

ƒ Winter ground-water levels are less than 10 feet from the surface in 30 to 50 percent of the systems and less than 3 feet from the surface in 3 to 6 percent of the systems.

The County has conducted numerous surveys and evaluations of the septic systems in the watershed since 1986. The County has sharply reduced the frequency of septic- system surveys since the late 1990s, as relatively few changes were reported and the value of continuing the surveys does not compete effectively with enforcement or other County Environmental Health Service priorities (John Ricker, personal communication, 2006). Because there is real value to neighborhood- or community-scale discussion, Balance staff have chosen to repeat the results digested in the 1996 sanitary survey, updating where warranted2:

Kings Creek - The greater Kings Creek area includes 800 developed parcels in the neighborhoods of Wildwood, Redwood Grove, River Rights, Lower Kings Creek, Sunbeam Woods, Blue Ridge, Madrona and Sequoia Drives, Lower Two Bar Creek, and Juanita Woods. This area has soils with significant clay content, high winter ground- water levels, small lots, and steep slopes. Despite potential significant constraints to septic systems, over 80 percent of the systems were found to be performing without any signs of failure during the wet winter of 1986. During the wet winter of 1993, the overall failure rate was below 2 percent. Most of the failing systems could be adequately upgraded using conventional systems. The Wastewater Management Plan concludes that a community system is not feasible because it lacks a disposal site.

Boulder Creek - The Boulder Creek area includes the developed areas centered around downtown Boulder Creek and extending a short distance up the valleys along Bear Creek, Boulder Creek, and the San Lorenzo River. This area has relatively permeable alluvial soils with some localized areas of clay soils. Winter ground-water levels are less than 10 feet below the surface in most of the area. Ground-water underlying Boulder Creek probably contributes nitrate to the San Lorenzo River. There have been repeated instances of septic system failure, with discharge of untreated effluent to roadside areas and eventually to the San Lorenzo River. During the early period of the County’s

2 Balance staff also reviewed the long-term data provided by the County and City for indications that the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake or the storms of 1995 and 1998 may have damaged sufficient systems to make a difference in bacterial or nitrate loadings. Neither constituent appears to have been affected by the three events queried.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-6 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds wastewater management program, the river downstream from Boulder Creek had the highest incidence of contamination by sewage of any area in the watershed. Conditions have improved significantly during recent years. During the winters of 1987 and 1988, 85 percent of the parcels surveyed were performing adequately and 4 percent were found to have surfacing sewage. In 1991, re-inspection of systems repaired as a result of the survey found that 90 percent were performing satisfactorily, and 95% of the systems were performing adequately in 1999 and 2001 (John Ricker, personnel communication, 2007). A feasibility study was conducted for a community sewage disposal system for the downtown area but it was found to be too costly. A community service district provides a regular pumpout service for the downtown area, with disposal outside of the watersheds.

Ben Lomond - The Ben Lomond area includes 780 developed parcels. There are no constraints to septic system performance in most of the Ben Lomond area. Historically the water quality in Ben Lomond has been the best of any developed area in the watershed. The survey conducted from 1989 through 1991 showed a 1 percent failure rate. In 1993, the failure rate was down to 0.5 percent. A community sewage disposal system is not warranted because of the cost and the low incidence of problems in this area.

Glen Arbor - The Glen Arbor area includes 500 parcels south of Ben Lomond. The area consists of three distinct zones; an upland area underlain by the Santa Margarita sandstone, an area of relatively steep slopes, and a lower area on well drained soils of the river terrace. Although the upland systems perform well, the effluent discharged to the highly permeable sandy soils contributes to elevated nitrate levels in the river. The lower portions of Glen Arbor have contributed to bacterial contamination of the river caused by high ground water and some pockets of clay soil. In recent years, a number of systems have been repaired. During the 1990 through 1993 surveys, a failure rate of 2 percent was found. A community disposal system was judged to be infeasible because of high cost and potential impacts on the Quail Hollow ground-water basin. Most homes in the Glen Arbor area were constructed during the late 1960s through late 1980s. Relatively few changes in the number of homes or of waste disposal systems since the early 1990s (White and Hecht, 1993) suggests that little if any change in effects on downstream community water supplies would be expected.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-7 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

Felton - The Felton area includes 820 developed parcels. This area was surveyed in 1989 and 1991. Much of the Felton area is on a broad alluvial flat, with high ground water and small lot sizes being the main constraints to proper septic system functioning. Failure rates in 1993 were 0.6 percent. El Solyo Heights is a separate neighborhood of 80 developed parcels at the north end of Felton. Failure rates in this area were 13 percent in 1989. Constraints to proper septic tank functioning include high ground water, clay soils, shallow depth to bedrock, moderate slopes, and presence of cuts and fills. Alternative systems are being required and this area is being watched closely by County staff. A community disposal system feasibility study concluded that there was not an adequate disposal site and that the project would be too costly to justify.

Brook Lomond - The Brook Lomond area consists of 120 developed parcels between Ben Lomond and Brookdale. This area has permeable alluvial soils with high ground water and some areas of clay soil. In the 1987 survey, 6 percent of the parcels were found to have failing septic systems. The County recommends improved onsite disposal rather than a community disposal system.

Forest Lakes - The Forest Lakes area includes 970 developed parcels immediately south of Felton. This area has small lots, and localized pockets of high ground water and dense clay soils. The 1990 and 1991 survey found a failure rate of 2 percent. There has been no indication of wastewater contamination in Gold Gulch, the stream that drains most of the area. Because of the scattered occurrence of problem parcels, community collection and disposal is not a feasible alternative to onsite treatment.

The two most significant potential impacts of wastewater disposal on the drinking water supplies in the San Lorenzo watershed are the release of pathogenic organisms and excessive nutrients.

3.2.2.2 Bacteria

A number of studies have been conducted to evaluate the proportion of the bacterial contributions resulting from wastewater discharge versus the proportion resulting from other sources, including waterfowl, livestock, pet waste, failing septic systems, sewer system leaks, encampments, and urban runoff. Ground-water monitoring conducted in Boulder Creek and as part of the County’s ongoing monitoring program has shown that fecal coliform levels decrease to background levels more than 25 feet from septic

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-8 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds systems. Beginning in 1981 (Johnson and others, 1982), the County has assessed fecal coliform concentration in shallow ground water underlying developed areas. The absence of fecal coliforms indicates that incidents of bacterial contamination of surface waters do not result from cumulative contamination of ground water, but result from failures and discharges to the ground surface from individual systems. Rapid detection of failing septic systems under the Wastewater Management Program and resulting system repairs and/or upgrades have substantially improved dry-season bacteria levels in the San Lorenzo River upstream from Santa Cruz (Santa Cruz County, 2003). As discussed below in Section 3.3 (urban runoff), results of recent microbiological source tracking indicate that birds are by far the major source of microbial contamination in the river, although human waste is a significant contributor, particularly during the wet season and downstream from suburban areas, such as Felton, and within the City of Santa Cruz (Ricker and Peters, 2006).

Blue-green algae (cyanobacteria), which are closer to bacteria than algae, have been reported in Loch Lomond during warm summer conditions (Chris Berry, personal communication, 2007).

3.2.2.3 Nitrate

Nitrate concentrations in the San Lorenzo River have increased five to seven times over background levels (Ricker, 1995), as discussed in Section 5. It is estimated that 50 to 80 percent of this increase is attributable to nitrate from wastewater (Ricker, 1989). Approximately two thirds of the nitrate load in the river comes from the area of the watershed underlain by the highly permeable Santa Margarita sandstone. Unlike bacteria, there has been a significant cumulative release of nitrate from septic systems in the watershed, particularly in areas underlain by sandy soils.

3.2.2.4 Loch Lomond Reservoir subwatershed

Most of the watershed is owned by the City of Santa Cruz, which has only the ranger’s residence. In the opinion of City staff, there are at most a handful of homes on parcels not held by the City and two wineries that drain to Newell Creek. County staff have noted road development in these headwater areas (see Section 3.15.3).

Loch Lomond routes wastewater from its recreational areas to vaults, which are pumped periodically. Wastes are transported to the Santa Cruz Wastewater Treatment Plant.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-9 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

3.2.2.5 North Coast Watersheds

Most septic systems in the North Coast watersheds are not anticipated to be a significant source of contamination because of: (a) very low residential densities, (b) a highly- dispersed pattern of residential settlement, and (c) soils and underlying geologic units which are generally loamy or crystalline and favorable for the use of conventional on- site systems. Scattered areas in these watersheds have substrates with limited percolation rates, principally in some of the older soils along Empire Grade (including the Pineridge subdivision), some shallow soils along Ice Cream Grade, and small areas underlain by shales in the upper Majors watershed. The largest community in the area, Bonny Doon, does not drain to the watersheds of Laguna or Majors creeks.

The water quality data presented in Section 5 indicate that total coliform bacteria concentrations in the Laguna and Majors Creek watersheds (but not Liddell Spring) have been increasing over the past 30 years. In both of these watersheds, the annual median total coliform concentrations have exceeded 100 MPN/100 ml each year since 1988. There are no fecal coliform or fecal streptococci data to use in an analysis of the sources of coliforms in these watersheds. The County’s recent microbiological source tracking effort (Ricker and Peters, 2006) did not collect data for North Coast streams but instead focused on the San Lorenzo River watershed, where development is concentrated, and on County beaches at the River mouth and to the south, which receive the greatest number of visitors. Failing septic systems are a potential source of increased coliforms in these streams, as are wildlife, waterfowl and livestock.

The nitrate data presented in Section 5 shows an increasing trend in annual median nitrate concentrations in Liddell Spring and Majors Creek over the past 30 years, with no long-term trend distinguishable in Laguna Creek. However, data from the past five years (2001-2006) shows a slight increasing trend in Laguna Creek, while median nitrate concentrations in Liddell Spring and Majors Creek appear to be declining.

The hydrogeologic report on the Bonny Doon quarry (Watkins-Johnson, 1992) indicated that nitrate concentrations were high (over 6 mg/l as nitrogen) in monitoring wells upgradient of the quarry. Because very little development exists upstream of this facility, the report suggested without elaboration that septic systems or a former poultry

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-10 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds operation along Smith Grade as the sources of this nitrate.3 Among other potential sources are explosives in use at the quarry. The likely sources of nitrate in the Laguna Creek and Majors Creek watersheds are the same as for microbial contamination.

3.2.3 Significance

After many years of study, the County and the Regional Board have concluded that the large majority of existing septic systems do not consistently contribute significantly to dry-season microbial concentrations measured in surface waters. Occasionally, failing septic systems are responsible for significant localized degradation of bacterial quality in surface waters during summer months. However, bacterial contributions from septic systems are probably greater during or following wet periods when runoff can convey surfacing sewage from failing systems to the River.

The San Lorenzo Nitrate Management Plan (Ricker, 1995) concluded that an estimated 84 percent of the nitrate load in the River resulted from human activities in the watershed. Two-thirds of the nitrate was attributed to wastewater discharges, particularly from septic systems in the highly-permeable Santa Margarita sandstone.

3.3 Urban Runoff

Urban runoff is that portion of stream flow originating from urban or densely- suburbanized areas. Most urban runoff occurs during storms; however, inter-storm period nuisance flows from urbanized areas can account for significant components to flow during those times. Urban runoff flows and contaminant concentrations are highly variable. Some factors affecting this variability include duration and intensity of rain events, specific urban land use (residential, commercial, industrial), and the length of the preceding dry period during which pollutants build up on the land surface. In addition to specific land uses, the atmosphere and automobiles are significant contributors to the contaminant load in urban runoff.

3.3.1 Contaminants of concern

The urban runoff contaminants of most concern to drinking water are microbial organisms and suspended sediments. Sources of microbes in urban runoff include:

3 The former poultry farm, in a highly karstic area locally known as the ‘sinkhole plain’, was discontinued at least 30 years ago, and should no longer seriously be considered as a discernible source of nitrogen in this sanitary survey.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-11 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds animal wastes from pets, birds and rodents; human waste from sewer system leaks and encampments; diffuse (nonpoint source) runoff, and decaying organic material in storm drains. Suspended sediment levels are often high in urban runoff because of the ease of mobilization and transport of small particles on impervious surfaces. In addition, suspended sediments are higher in runoff from newly-developed areas prior to establishment of vegetation. Suspended sediments in urban runoff contribute to high turbidities in the stream system during wet weather and also are significant because contaminants may be adsorbed to the sediment particles and transported into the streams. Note that construction of new impervious surfaces in urban areas can result in higher peak flows which, without mitigation, can lead to increased in-stream erosion and turbidity.

Other common contaminants of concern in urban runoff include: metals (notably copper, lead, and zinc), hydrocarbons, and pesticides. These contaminants can be significant to aquatic life in the receiving stream but at the levels found in the Santa Lorenzo River, have not been shown to be of exceptional significance to the drinking water quality.

3.3.2 Existing conditions

The population in the San Lorenzo River watershed centers around the communities of Boulder Creek, Ben Lomond, Brookdale and Felton. There are also pockets of development in the Boulder Creek Golf and Country Club area, along Newell Creek (Rancho Rio), lower Bear Creek, Zayante Creek, Lompico Creek, and Paradise Park, and in numerous small valleys confluent with the San Lorenzo River. Rural residential areas along Bean Creek Road at the fringes of Scotts Valley are also experiencing growth. The rest of the watershed, as noted above, is sparsely populated.

Many houses and residential areas were built during several speculative vacation housing booms in the 1890s, 1900s and from 1920 to 1940. A large percentage of existing homes were built before 1960. More recent housing has been primarily for year-round residences. Many of the older vacation homes were built very close to the creeks. Further development within the riparian corridors is currently limited, requiring County exemptions. Riparian corridors now extend out to the edge of the riparian woodland if the woodland is extensive enough to have been mapped on County vegetation maps. Otherwise, they are defined to be 50 feet from the high water mark for a perennial

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-12 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds stream, less for an intermittent stream, and more in the coastal zone area. Most new housing has been infills or on rural acreage, with few if any major subdivisions within County jurisdiction. One exception is the construction of a 60-lot subdivision on the Graham Hill Show Grounds. A 65-unit low-income or retirement community is proposed for a parcel adjoining the Felton Fair shopping mall off Graham Hill Road. Future residential growth is expected to be mostly accommodated with minor land divisions.

In October 1990, the EPA issued final regulations requiring NPDES Municipal Stormwater permits for urban runoff from cities with a population of 100,000 or greater, from certain types of industries, and from construction sites which involve a land disturbance of greater than 5 acres (Phase I). Although there are no cities this large in Santa Cruz County, the Central Coast office of the Regional Board, which administers the NPDES stormwater permit program, worked with County and municipal staff in anticipation of future regulations. In 1999, EPA expanded the NPDES Municipal Stormwater permit program to require permits for urban runoff discharges from cities with a population of less than 100,000 and from industries or construction sites which result in a land disturbance of from 1 to 5 acres (Phase II). The City and County subsequently developed comprehensive Storm Water Management Plans (SWMPs) describing compliance with the new regulations. The plans were submitted to the Regional Board with applications for coverage under the Phase II permit but the SWMPs have not yet been approved. Additional details about urban runoff regulations are included in Section 5 of this sanitary survey.

Watersheds in the study area are relatively unindustrialized, so there are few facilities which must comply with the state’s NPDES General Industrial Stormwater permit program. The state permit requires industrial facilities to implement pollution prevention measures and to collect monitoring data during rainfall events. Each industrial facility files a Notice of Intent (NOI) which certifies that it will comply with these permit requirements. There is currently little oversight and enforcement of the industrial stormwater permit program because most of the state’s effort has been channeled into simply identifying facilities which should be under permit. Types of industrial facilities which must file a NOI to comply with the state permit include: manufacturers (food, textiles, lumber, paper, chemicals, petroleum, rubber, plastic, metals, stone, clay, glass, machinery, electric, electronic, equipment, instruments,

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-13 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds cement, phosphate, asphalt, fertilizer); confined animal facilities with over 700 animals; printing operations; recyclers; landfills; mining operations; transportation businesses (such as bus and trucking companies and airports); petroleum bulk plants; all NPDES wastewater dischargers with a design flow greater than 1.0 million gallons per day; Superfund sites; and steam electric power generator facilities.

A list of active industrial stormwater permittees in Santa Cruz County was downloaded from the SWRCB database in January 2007. Only 59 facilities county-wide have filed a NOI with the SWRCB. Most of these are located in Watsonville (26) and the City of Santa Cruz (16), outside of the sanitary survey study area. One computer technology manufacturer in the Bean Creek watershed portion of Scotts Valley has filed a NOI. Two other facilities within the San Lorenzo River watershed have filed for NOIs: the San Lorenzo Valley School District (for their bus transportation yard), and the Ben Lomond Landfill (for control of surface runoff from the closed landfill facility). Two wineries (David Bruce and Byington) which drain to Newell Creek were listed in the SWRCB database under San Mateo County. Airports and quarries in the Scotts Valley and Bonny Doon area are not in the SWRCB database.

3.3.2.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed

The San Lorenzo River watershed is in Zone 8 of the Santa Cruz Flood Control District. Drainage in the towns along Highway 9 consists of a combination of sheet flow, roadside swales and ditches, and some inlets and piping in low spots. In smaller population centers, the engineered drainage system consists mostly of cross culverts to move stormwater across roads. There is an urban runoff control structural feature, a detention basin, and several check dams downstream of the Rancho Rio subdivision. These facilities were installed by the County Planning Department after construction of the subdivision to minimize the considerable erosion resulting from disturbance of this sandy area.

Most of the City of Scotts Valley drains to Carbonera and Branciforte creeks, which enter the San Lorenzo River downstream of the Tait Street diversion and are outside of the survey area. However, the western part of the town, which includes several industrial facilities (RMC Lonestar Quarry, Skypark Development), drains to Bean Creek. Felton Quarry is in the headwaters of the Gold Gulch subwatershed, southwest of Felton.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-14 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

In April 2005, the Coastal Watershed Council (CWC) initiated the Scotts Valley Urban Watch-First Flush storm drain monitoring program, an expansion of the larger Urban Watch Program started in 1997 with the City of Monterey and the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (McCloud and others, 2005). Although monitoring focused on Carbonera Creek, which is outside of the San Lorenzo River watershed, constituent concentrations are likely typical of Scotts Valley, including areas that drain to Bean Creek. Twice weekly, from June through November 2005, ending with the first significant rain event or ‘first-flush’4, trained volunteers monitored discharges at storm drains for a number of field parameters. Samples were also collected monthly for laboratory analysis of nitrate, ammonia, orthophosphate, copper, and bacteria (E. Coli and total coliform). Nitrate-nitrogen concentrations ranged from < 0.05 mg/L to 2.83 mg/L, ammonia-nitrogen ranged from <0.015 mg/L to 0.71 mg/L, orthophosphate ranged from <0.10 mg/L to 0.67 mg/L, and total copper was detected only once at 0.5 mg/L. Total coliform levels ranged from 637 MPN/100 ml to >24,192 MPN/100 ml and E. Coli ranged from 10 MPN/100 ml to 2,613 MPN/100 ml, often exceeding County water quality objectives of 400 MPN/100 ml for E. Coli and 10,000 MPN/100 ml for total coliform but generally at the lower end of the range of concentrations measured at other sites in the Urban Watch Program.

The County’s Water Resources Program has been sampling the San Lorenzo River since 1968 for chemical and microbial constituents. The program currently encompasses collection and analysis of about 1,000 water samples total annually from 120 freshwater and marine sites throughout the County (Ricker and others, 2001). Heavy metals (e.g., zinc, copper, cadmium, and lead) and toxic organic compounds, such as pesticides and PCBs, have often been detected at low levels in ambient receiving waters of the San Lorenzo River watershed and occasionally at higher levels in storm drain discharges. Because these constituents can bioconcentrate in tissues, the County recently conducted a study focused on sampling sites in the lower River, including analysis of tissues from freshwater clams (Ricker and others, 2001). The results were generally consistent with previous monitoring studies in the watershed, the region, and the State (c.f. EPA Nationwide Urban Runoff Program): low levels of pesticides and PCBs (at 2 to 7 percent of hazardous thresholds), elevated concentrations of cadmium and zinc (both of geologic

4 Stormwater runoff after an extended dry period typically has higher concentrations of pollutants as compared to stormwater runoff later in the season, following more rainfall. The stormwater carrying this high initial pollutant load is referred to as 'first flush' runoff.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-15 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds origin); and elevated levels of lead (presumably from prior use in gasoline). In all cases, concentrations were below levels of biotic or regulatory concern.

Bacteria levels in the San Lorenzo River have often exceeded County water quality objectives and the River is formally designated by the State and Federal governments as impaired due to elevated pathogen levels. However, bacteria levels in the upper watershed are typically much lower than those at the mouth of the river, and recent monitoring data show considerable improvement in dry-season bacteria levels, which in summer months, now generally meet standards for safe swimming at locations upstream from Santa Cruz (Santa Cruz County, 2004). Bacteria concentrations during storm events remain high, and are more elevated at downstream stations, reflecting proportionally greater contributions from suburban and urban areas within the City of Santa Cruz. Despite progress in reducing bacteria levels, the Regional Board recently decided to combine the TMDL for the Branciforte Creek/San Lorenzo River Estuary with the TMDL for the Lompico Creek/upper San Lorenzo River watershed, based on elevated bacteria levels at two locations on the River during summer 2006, and higher- than-expected bacteria levels in 2005-2006 sampling.

Funded by a Proposition 13 grant from the SWRCB, the County recently analyzed over 2,000 water samples collected from 2002-2004 in storm drains, stream reaches, and beaches in an effort to identify the source and causes of elevated bacteria levels (Ricker and Peters, 2006). Ribotyping, a method of microbiological source tracking that differentiates human E. coli from other types of E. coli, was employed to discriminate between fecal coliform sources. Overall, birds were found to account for over 50 percent of bacterial contamination in samples from the San Lorenzo River, and 64 percent of summer bacteria samples in the upper watershed. In contrast, human waste was identified in approximately 11 percent of all samples, and in none of the dry-season samples from the upper watershed. Human contributions in the River were found to increase significantly between Sycamore Grove and the mouth, due to inflows from urban areas, and were higher in wet weather when runoff scours storm drains and mobilizes waste from developed areas, encampments and the occasional failing septic system. Decomposing organic materials and sediments in storm drains were found to provide a good environment for bacteria to thrive and multiply. Increased cleaning of catch basins in the City and unincorporated areas of the County is expected to reduce bacteria contributions to San Lorenzo River from urban runoff.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-16 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

Recent work in coastal San Mateo County (Ivanetich and others, 2006) was also able to distinguish fecal bacteria originating from dog, deer, horse, seagull and human sources. It is notable that the Santa Cruz County microbial source assessment study found that dogs alone accounted for about 7 percent of the dry-season bacteria in the upper watershed, and about 12 percent of wet-weather bacteria at Felton (Ricker and Peters, 2006). Waste from domestic animals such as cats, dogs and chickens probably contributes greatly to the high fecal coliform counts in the first flush of stormwater through urbanized areas. Further inquiries into sources and travel pathways of pathogens in the San Lorenzo Valley watershed, in particular, would be worthwhile, with special attention to streams reaches downstream of densely-urban communities and in areas receiving summer baseflow from sandy aquifers.

3.3.2.2 Loch Lomond Reservoir and the upper Newell Creek watershed

Urban runoff into Loch Lomond is effectively limited to contributions from Bear Creek Road, which are minor in magnitude.

3.3.2.3 North Coast Watersheds

There are no major towns in the North Coast watersheds. The Bonny Doon Airport is a small landing strip for private planes. There is also quarry activity in the Liddell Spring watershed.

3.3.3 Significance

Overall, urban runoff directly contributes a significant part of the total microbial load in the river system during summer and winter, it enriches summer baseflows with added nutrients, and it contributes some part of the sediment load entering the River during rain events.

Most ‘urban’ development in the San Lorenzo Valley is residential. Many of the residents seek a rural residential lifestyle, and the contributed contaminants (microbes, nutrients, sediment) may best be seen in that light. Many homes in the four main communities are very close to and positioned well above the stream system, such that contaminants can move rapidly from neighborhood areas in the main communities into the channels. In these areas, source control to reduce runoff has particular value as a way of reducing contaminants. In particular, the results of the recent microbial source tracking study show that efforts to minimize or prevent dry-season runoff from

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-17 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds landscape irrigation and other human activities would reduce transport of bacteria and other contaminants to storm drains and the River during the summer months when dilution is minimal and recreational use is at its peak.

Elsewhere, homes overlying sandy soils contribute a disproportionate volume of nutrients which enter the streams through the sandy aquifers. As discussed further in Sections 5 and 6 below, nutrient concentrations are elevated during summer months in the streams with appreciable sandy soil areas in their watersheds, offering different source-control opportunities in the sandy areas away from the streams. Because sandy soil areas occur in both the North Coast and San Lorenzo watersheds, efforts to address the particular issues of sandy soils can be especially effective over a period of decades. There are few industrial facilities or large expanses of paved areas.

3.4 Agricultural Land Use

Santa Cruz is a strongly agricultural county. The majority of the existing row-crop acreage is located along the coast, in the Pajaro Valley in South County and on the marine terraces of the North Coast, neither of which extend into the watersheds of this survey. Commercial cropping with the study area watersheds is presently limited to small areas of vineyards and Christmas tree farms. Both watershed areas once supported widespread cultivation of apples and other orchard fruits wherever suitable sites with deep soils and southern exposures were found, but most such areas had already gone out of commercial production before the onset of extensive pesticide use in orchards began during the early 1960s. In scattered locations throughout the study area row crops are grown on a commercial or horticultural basis but these operations are on limited acreage and typically use organic practices.

3.4.1 Contaminants of concern

The primary contaminant of concern from these types of agricultural uses is sediment from erosion of fallow or improperly tilled land and from eroding drainages downstream from cultivated areas. Other potential contaminants include pesticides, herbicides, and organic matter in stormwater runoff from the fields and vineyards.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-18 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

3.4.2 Existing conditions 3.4.2.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed

In the San Lorenzo Valley, vineyards and Christmas tree farms occupy the largest agricultural acreage. Several established vineyards exist in the area; in Felton (Hallcrest Vineyard and the Organic Wine Works), next to Bear Creek Road on the ridge above Loch Lomond (Byington and Bear Creek Vineyards), and in side valleys near Boulder Creek (P & M Staiger and Equinox), along Bean Creek in Scotts Valley (Roudon Smith Vineyard), up Highway 9 near Waterman Gap (Ahlgren) and along the top of the watershed divide at Skyline Boulevard (Zayante Vineyard). Small personal vineyards are commonly seen on larger residential parcels with adequate sunlight. County enforcement staff considers small private vineyards to be problematic in Hubbard Gulch and other small tributary drainages to the San Lorenzo, largely because of poor drainage design, improper grading, and inadequate erosion control.

Unlike vineyards, Christmas tree farms are operated with little cultivation or disturbance to the soil surface. Field visits to several of these operations throughout the watershed showed that annual grasses, forbs and bracken serve as a cover crop between rows of spruce and fir. The roads in the tree farms are intermittently used, with the greatest use generally during the two months prior to Christmas.

To a lesser extent, apples and other tree fruits are still grown in the old and declining orchards in the sunnier aspects of the Santa Cruz Mountains. According to County Agricultural Commission staff, little to no new commercial acreage has been developed during the last two decades. The existing orchards tend to be managed organically or with few applications of chemical pesticides or fertilizers, and minimal tillage.

Small commercial greenhouse operations and flower farms exist along Bean Creek and in the San Lorenzo Valley. Rhododendrons are no longer grown in the Bean Creek subwatershed, nor elsewhere in the San Lorenzo Valley (Roberta Haver, former owner, personal communication, 2006). Pesticide use is minor. University of California Agricultural Extension staff indicated that the primary potential contaminant in these container greenhouses is nitrogen, which is flushed through the containers by proper irrigation, and which exceeds crop needs typically by 20 percent during each watering. These operations are located on the extremely permeable Santa Margarita sandstones, which provides the excellent drainage needed for these uses, but which may permit the

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-19 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds greenhouses to become a source of nitrogen to both Bean Creek and the Santa Margarita aquifer.

3.4.2.2 Loch Lomond Reservoir subwatershed

Other than the vineyard described above, there is no conventional agriculture in the Loch Lomond watershed. In the past, small-scale diversions and fertilizer spills associated with covert marijuana plantations have been reported on tributaries that drain into Newell Creek and Loch Lomond.

3.4.2.3 North Coast Watersheds

The coastal terraces of northern Santa Cruz County are one of the classic agricultural areas of California, supporting far more cultivated acreage than the San Lorenzo Valley. The crops are grown mainly on the lowest two terraces along Hwy 1, below the diversion points on the North Coast streams. These areas are farmed primarily for brussel sprouts and (less frequently) artichokes. Both crops require the unique climate dominated by marine fog found on these lower terraces. Other crops include lettuce, strawberries, broccoli, and flowers.

Two vineyards operate in the North Coast, the Bonny Doon and McHenry Vineyards. Cattle are occasionally grazed on the mosaic of grasslands, oak/madrone woodland, and mixed evergreen forests which separate the belt of row crops along the coast from the residential areas and orchards of the Empire Grade portion of the Bonny Doon area. A small portion of this area drains to Majors Creek upstream of the intake. Some Christmas tree farms are also located in Bonny Doon, near the northern end of Empire Grade. While these are presently outside of the Laguna and Majors Creek watersheds, both vineyards and tree farms of various sorts could expand into both two watersheds.

3.4.3 Significance

As a minor land use in the water supply watersheds, agricultural production does not appear to be a major source of concern at present and in the foreseeable future. The two most visible crops in the watersheds, Christmas trees and grapes, tend to be grown at higher elevations, along ridges and in areas above the fog line, away from the major streams. Observations at Christmas tree farms in the survey area suggest that these are unlikely to be major sources of contamination, or erosion.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-20 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

This, however, was not the case for several vineyards. Typically located on slopes with loose, sandy soils, vineyards are a source of sediment and persistent turbidity in several tributaries to the San Lorenzo River. Controlling weeds by harrowing between rows leaves soils exposed to rainfall and rill erosion. Marginal to poor drainage design and inadequate erosion control in many residential vineyards and at least one commercial operation have been cited by County resource planners as causes of bed sedimentation impairing fisheries and instream habitat. During 2003, inadequate drainage and erosion-control design resulted in a major regulatory enforcement action against a new vineyard in the headwaters of Tarwater Creek, a short distance across the San Mateo County line and in a topographic setting very similar to those found along Castle Rock Ridge. Also in San Mateo County, slopes of 40 to 50 percent are planted to varietals in a recently planted vineyard adjacent to the inferred ground-water-shed of Tunnel Spring, a primary source of water supply for the community of La Honda – served by a water system similar in size to that of Lompico. Expansion of vineyards to other steep ridgelines throughout the region is foreseeable. Some vineyards use organic practices; others employ pesticides to a light or a moderate degree.

Cultivation of other crops is less likely to affect the quality of water supplies, because of the minimal acreage of land under cultivation and the generally low level use of pesticides.

3.5 Grazing Livestock

Watersheds in the study area are primarily forested or vegetated brushlands of various types, so the extent of grazed areas is also limited, particularly in the San Lorenzo watershed. The North Coast watersheds are better suited for livestock and have had several cattle and dairy operations working in the subject water supply drainages. Throughout the watersheds, impacts from grazing cattle are less than those of confined horses, except in areas where cattle are watered from streams. This section includes discussion of cattle and individual or small horse groupings; the main discussion of horses as they affect water quality is within Section 3.6.

3.5.1 Contaminants of concern

Erosion and waste products are of primary concern. Where unfenced, destruction of streambanks and wetland vegetation by grazing animals causes an increase in erosion, indirect loss of channel stability (eventually generating pulses of sediment entering

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-21 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds directly into the creeks), and persistent turbidity. Manure, urine, and pathogens may be introduced directly into streamflow year round, with elevated rates of transport into waterways during wet periods.

3.5.2 San Lorenzo Valley

Residential development of the valley bottoms, stream terraces, and sunny ridgelines in the survey area puts a premium on "buildable" land. This trend, combined with the gradual succession from grassland to chaparral, in the absence of wildfire, has gradually reduced cattle and sheep operations in the San Lorenzo Valley.

No active commercial cattle operations are known in the San Lorenzo watershed, other than occasional use of small acreages in the Bean Creek subwatershed. Equestrian use is widespread in the watershed and horses are kept on residential parcels and at commercial or boarding stables. The latter facilities typically have more horses but also have larger pastures for grazing (and dispersal of animal wastes). As a result of the low numbers, grazing animals pose a minor threat to the water quality of the San Lorenzo watershed.

3.5.3 Lock Lomond Reservoir and upper Newell Creek watershed

No grazing animals were encountered in the Loch Lomond area during our visits to the lake and upper watershed. The City does not allow riding animals in the watershed area.

3.5.4 North Coast Watersheds

As discussed above, a limited amount of rangeland drains to Majors Creek upstream of the City's diversion structure, including the northern parts of Grey Whale Ranch. These areas seem to be grazed intermittently, principally by individual horses or small groups of horses, with occasional cattle grazing (apparently) under lease arrangements. Most of these grasslands are located along ridgelines or on slopes distant from the streams, reducing but not eliminating the potential for contributing nutrients, pathogens, and sediment to the streams. Further downstream on Liddell Creek, beyond the boundaries of the survey area, issues of livestock management are being addressed by the County. Trails, and roads used as trails, do come close to the main stem and east fork of Majors Creek; these could prove to be a small, but perhaps growing, source of sediment and pathogens.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-22 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

3.5.5 Significance

Pathogenic microorganisms are the major source of concern when contact between grazing animals and water supplies occurs. Hecht and others (1991) identified horses as a significant contributor to the San Lorenzo Valley nitrate budget, and the County has taken measures to assess and control equine nitrate contributions to both surface and ground waters (c.f., the 1995 Wastewater Management Plan and the 2001 Watershed Management Plan Update) to reduce costs of treatment for taste and odor problems. Where access to water is limited only to streams, degradation of habitat and bank stability is evident (see also Section 3.6). Development of improved water sources for grazing animals has played a significant part in limiting potential adverse impacts to water quality.

3.6 Concentrated Animal Facilities

While traveling through the watershed it is apparent that although there are a number of commercial stables which house larger numbers of horses, there are also many residences that support one or two horses, despite small lot sizes and/or limited acreage suitable for pasturing horses or applying manure. While many of these small residential facilities are well-managed, it is also common to observe corral areas that are bare or partially denuded of vegetation from overgrazing, and manure management is often limited to stockpiling on site. Conditions contrast with the commercial facilities, which tend to have greater capacity to manage drainage and manure accumulations responsibly, in part because of their greater visibility and liability.

3.6.1 Contaminants of concern

Horses are considered a major source of nitrogen and pathogens and can also contribute to persistent turbidity in the water supply watersheds. The equine population in both the San Lorenzo River and North Coast watersheds appears to be increasing. Although horses were a relatively newly-recognized concern during the 1996 sanitary survey, some important actions have been taken during the past decade to protect water quality and improve care of the animals. One key step was publication of Horsekeeping: A Guide to Land Management for Clean Water, in 2001 (CABRCD, 2001). This manual for horse owners, developed by the Council of Bay Area Resource Conservation Districts and the USDA NRCS, explains water quality concerns, provides technical assistance with design and implementation of structural control measures, and includes a directory of conservation-related resources for further exploration. Based on use of this manual, and

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-23 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds with funding from the SWRCB through Propositions 13 and 50 (Manure and Erosion Prevention), the Santa Cruz County Resource Conservation District (RCD) and Ecology Action developed a Livestock and Land Program to educate owners about best management practices to improve drainage and manure management. Working with both commercial and residential facilities, and coordinating with the Santa Cruz County Horsemen’s Association, the Program has provided technical assistance and cost-sharing to install filter strips, energy dissipators, covered manure storage areas and other improved practices at a number of demonstration sites. The RCD reports that these measures have also been widely-installed at residential sites following owner attendance at technical trainings and workshops sponsored by the Program, and through outreach via a Peer Leader Program (Angela Stuart, personal communication, 2007).

Many more horses are now boarded in private paddocks or boarding facilities with control measures in place than was the case at the time of the 1996 sanitary survey. Still, County Environmental Health and Planning staff all emphasized the need to develop equestrian management policies in the County to facilitate effective management practices. Throughout the subject watersheds, stables or paddocks are frequently located on the edges of properties, often in swales and along waterways. This bare ground is usually a source of sediment, and offers minimal breakdown of manure and nitrogen uptake by plants. The net result is often a rapid transport of these pollutants into surface and shallow ground waters during periods of rain.

3.6.2 San Lorenzo Watershed

The County does not maintain a comprehensive inventory of stables but staff estimate that there may be more than 300 horses in large stables within the San Lorenzo River watershed, and an equal number in smaller residential stables (Ricker, 2001). While numbers of animals at commercial stables vary from year to year, some of the largest stables are Covered Bridge, formerly Chaparral Stables (70 to 100 horses) in Felton, Eddy Ranch (40 to 50 horses) on Bear Creek, Zayante Equestrian Center, formerly Horse Haven (20 to 40 horses) on Zayante Creek, Glenwood Equestrian Center (20 to 25 horses) on Bean Creek, and Lichen Oaks (15 horses) in Quail Hollow. Additionally, the Santa Cruz County Horsemen’s Association operates a regular calendar of events at the Graham Hill Showgrounds, including overnight and short-term stays for multiple animals.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-24 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

3.6.3 Loch Lomond Reservoir subwatershed

No confined animal facilities are reported or were noted in this watershed.

3.6.4 North Coast Watersheds

The numbers of animals kept in the North Coast watersheds are not available, yet project staff with many years experience in this area of Santa Cruz County continue to note an increase in both the number of rural homes and animals kept on these newer properties. Some homes are on one to five acre parcels, often with one or two horses, several chickens, and other domestic animals. Areas of bare soil are frequently seen in the paddocks and associated areas.

One significant change in this area since the 2001 update has been establishment of Vigne Farms, a commercial stable located in Bonny Doon. The facility was cited for code violations due to grading and construction without the requisite permits but was subsequently approved by the Planning Commission. Although Vigne Farms drains to Liddell Creek, and is not within the topographic watershed of Liddell Spring, due to the karstic terrain, it is still within the Spring’s subsurface contributing area. The stable’s manure management plan includes a covered, concrete-floored manure storage bunker sized to serve 50 horses, the maximum number permitted, although there are only about 25 horses at present. Surface water quality monitoring immediately downstream of the facility was a condition of permit approval, the first such requirement for an equestrian facility within the County. Four storms have been monitored to date and review of the results by County Planning and Environmental Health staff show no discernable impacts (Dave Carlson and John Ricker, personal communications, 2007).

3.6.5 Significance

Wastes from horses have been estimated to contribute significantly to the pathogen and nitrogen load in the region's upper watersheds. One systematic study (Hecht and others, 1991) estimated that horses in the San Lorenzo Valley contributed nitrogen equal to one fifth or more of the amount released from septic systems. The San Lorenzo Nitrate Management Plan estimated that livestock and stables contributed about 6 percent of the nitrate load in the River (Ricker, 1995). The recent microbial source assessment found that horses were responsible for 10 percent of the wet weather E. coli samples at the Felton station but less than 2 percent of the wet weather E. coli load downstream (Ricker and Peters, 2006). No bacteria contributions from horses were

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-25 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds noted in dry season samples. Other types of confined animal facilities do not appear to be a major concern in the subject area.

Both commercial stables and backyard paddocks can be found in almost all sub- watersheds of the San Lorenzo and North Coast water supply drainages, and animal wastes receive less treatment than human wastes and are more easily mobilized into streams. These facts suggest that effective manure management at all times of the year, but especially during winter and spring months, is critically important in reducing nitrogen and pathogen transport to ground and surface waters.

3.7 Pesticide and Herbicide Use

Pesticides and herbicides are chemical compounds specifically formulated for their lethal effects on animal and plant life. Pesticides and herbicides are used in: (1) agriculture, (2) rights-of-way along roadsides, (3) landscaped areas such as parks and golf courses, (4) for structural pest control, and (5) by individuals. Volumes of specific chemicals used annually for the first four uses are represented in the reported use information collected by the County Agricultural Commissioner and reported to the State Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR). The fifth use, by individuals in the home and garden, is unreported. Thus, a complete accounting of the chemicals used or the amounts applied is unavailable. The toxicity of compounds available to individuals – and generally to licensed professional applicators as well – has decreased markedly over the past decade and half beginning in the late 1980s.

All pesticides and herbicides used by licensed applicators (such as crop dusters, landscape maintenance professionals, and structural control businesses) are reported and sales of “restricted” chemicals are also reported by distributors. The Department of Pesticide Registration determines whether a pesticide/herbicide is classed as restricted based on its potential hazard to humans, animals, crops, or the environment in general. The County Agricultural Commissioner enforces related laws and regulations within the county, issues Restricted Materials Permits, and collects the use data which is then reported to the DPR. In addition, the City’s Integrated Pest Management (IPM) policy guides pesticide and herbicide use on City-managed lands.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-26 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

3.7.1 Contaminants of concern

All pesticides and herbicides can be considered undesirable in a drinking water source. The specific chemicals of most concern, however, are the synthetic organic chemicals (SOC) regulated under the Phase II/V Rules (see Section 5). The Phase II/V pesticides and herbicides are those which EPA has established requirements for drinking water (see Section 5).

3.7.2 Existing conditions

Comprehensive information on the specific types and locations of pesticide and herbicide use throughout the North Coast and San Lorenzo River watersheds was not developed for the original 1996 sanitary survey or for this or the prior update. Logically, such use will be a tiny fraction of the applications throughout Santa Cruz County. Most pesticides for which regional records are kept are used for agricultural activities in the Watsonville area and in the marine terrace agriculture downstream of the North Coast watersheds, rather than within the North Coast and San Lorenzo watersheds. Similarly, most of the reported structural pest control use will be from the urban and industrial areas which are mostly outside the survey watersheds; i.e. the Cities of Santa Cruz, Watsonville, and Scotts Valley.

Use along rights-of-way and for landscape maintenance are primarily of concern in the San Lorenzo River watershed and are discussed under that subsection.

Although there are no reported data for individual home and garden use, such usage is likely to be relatively small in these watersheds. There is a pervasive sensitivity to chemical use and a general public sentiment opposed to such use which will continue to limit applications at the watershed scale.

3.7.2.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed

The most sensitive right-of-way in the watersheds, because of its proximity to the San Lorenzo River is State Highway 9, which is maintained by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Caltrans staff report that herbicide use along Highway 9 has been reduced 50 percent or more since the early 1990s under the agency’s NPDES permit for roadside vegetation maintenance (Roy Freer, personal communication, 2007). Broadband spraying of the herbicides simazine and diuron has been discontinued in favor of targeted applications of less-toxic materials at low rates immediately adjacent to

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-27 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds fixed safety hardware (e.g., signposts, guardrails, reflectors), maintaining a minimum 20-foot buffer between the spray zone and the edge of live streams or the River. Caltrans staff currently apply two herbicides annually, both in late fall/early winter: a systemic pre-emergent, Goaltender 2 (oxyfluorfen), and a more typical pre-emergent, Oust (sulfometuron methyl), that also has some post-emergent properties. Oxyfluorfen disperses readily in water, is slightly mobile and is acutely toxic to aquatic organisms but practically non-toxic to terrestrial biota and birds. Sulfometuron methyl is also readily dispersible in water and moderately mobile, but practically non-toxic to both aquatic and terrestrial biota. Both materials are moderately persistent.

Caltrans uses spot treatments as needed with the broad spectrum (non-selective) systemic herbicide Roundup (glyphosate), and the selective (broadleaf) systemic herbicide Garlon 4 (triclopyr) for brush control in the highway right-of-way, to remove woody vegetation such as blackberries, poison oak and tree seedlings before they interfere with visibility or impinge on the roadway. Roundup has been considered to be one of the more benign herbicides from a drinking water point-of-view, because the active ingredient, glyphosate, is practically non-toxic to aquatic and terrestrial biota and effectively immobile, being strongly adsorbed to soil. However, recent research suggests that at least one of the inert ingredients in Roundup has higher toxicity. Triclpyr is slightly soluble in water, moderately persistent, potentially mobile, and slightly toxic to mammals but highly toxic to aquatic biota.

Vegetation maintenance along County roads in the San Lorenzo River watershed has relied on targeted mowing since the Board of Supervisors passed a moratorium on roadside herbicide spraying in May 2005. Because mowing is far more labor intensive than spraying, it is reportedly used to attain specific safety maintenance goals at particular locations. If driver safety appears to be being compromised, the moratorium allows requests for exceptions but the new policy is so recent that the medium- and long-term effects of the change in practices have yet to be discerned (John Swenson, Public Works Department, personal communication, 2007). In conjunction with the moratorium, the County has obtained a grant to evaluate improved roadside maintenance practices in riparian areas in order to reduce or eliminate the use of herbicides.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-28 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

The four State parks in this watershed are: Big Basin Redwoods State Park, Castle Rock State Park, Fall Creek State Park5 and the Henry Cowell State Park. These parks use very little pesticides and herbicides as they are mostly preserved natural environments with very little landscaped area.

The four County parks in this watershed are: Felton Covered Bridge, Highlands Park, Ben Lomond Mill Street Park, and Quail Hollow Ranch. The County uses very little pesticides and herbicides, and none are applied at the Mill Street Park because of its location immediately next to the San Lorenzo River (Bill Ratto, personal communication, 2007). The pre-emergent selective (broadleaf) herbicide Surflan (Oryzalin) and the post- emergent selective (broadleaf) herbicide Trimec (a mixture of 2, 4-D, Dicamba and MCPP) are occasionally used on turfed areas. Oryzalin is soluble in water, practically non-toxic to mammals and moderately toxic to aquatic organisms. The active ingredients in Trimec are extremely soluble in water, have low toxicity to mammals, and are acutely toxic to aquatic invertebrates. Roundup is also spot-applied on an as-needed basis. A rodenticide for gopher control is also used.

The golf course at the Boulder Creek Golf and Country Club is managed based on IPM principles and use of least toxic materials at the lowest rates feasible. The course employs two licensed pesticide applicators and primarily uses broadleaf weed control herbicides and fungicides (Bill Keller, personal communication, 2007). Confront (Triclopyr and Clopyralid), a post-emergent selective (broadleaf) herbicide is applied to fairways annually. Greens are treated approximately monthly from April to October with fungicides, rotating products regularly to inhibit build-up of resistance. The fungicides currently used comprise the contact fungicide Daconil Weatherstik (Chlorothalonil), which is mixed with one of several systemic fungicides: Banner Maxx (Propiconazole), Signature (Fosetyl-Aluminum) or Heritage (Azoxystrobin). The active ingredient in each of these products has low to very low mammalian toxicity. Triclopyr, clopyralid, propiconazole and fosetyl-aluminum are slightly toxic to practically non- toxic to aquatic species, while azoxystrobin and chlorothalonil are extremely toxic to fish and aquatic invertebrates

5 More correctly, the Fall Creek unit of Henry Cowell State Park. Popular nomenclature used here.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-29 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

3.7.2.2 Loch Lomond Reservoir and upper Newell Creek watershed

The Loch Lomond Recreation Area is mostly non-landscaped and uses mechanical weed control for road right-of-way and other park maintenance. Although no pesticides, herbicides, or fertilizers are applied in these areas, consistent with the City of Santa Cruz policy, City policy will allow applications of Roundup on the firebreaks/ridgetops if absolutely necessary. Over the past five years, the City has attempted several methods to control algae (primarily blue-green algae or cyanobacteria) in the reservoir. Historically, pesticides containing copper as the active ingredient were successfully used. In an effort to reduce copper use, the City installed a mechanical mixing system (Solarbee® Reservoir Circulators) on a trial basis from May 2003 through September 2005. The Solarbees® were expected to remove the potentially harmful blue-green algae by creating conditions more favorable to its competitors (diatoms and green algae). Unfortunately this method did not work in Loch Lomond. The City also considered ultrasonic devices (SonicSolutions™) but found them logistically impractical. At present, the City uses a combination of sodium bicarbonate and hydrogen peroxide (PAK 27) (Scott Lang, personal communication, 2006). Copper application would be allowed under General Permit No. CAG990005, the Statewide General NPDES Permit for Discharges of Aquatic Pesticides.

3.7.2.3 North Coast Watersheds

Pesticide control of weeds at the quarries upstream of the points of diversion has been noted on several occasions by City staff. Other use of pesticides and herbicides in these watersheds is likely to be very small as agriculture and landscaped areas are a very minor land use, and there are no large urban areas or major thoroughfares. Pesticides are not being used within the 240 acres of watershed lands, consistent with City policies favoring mechanical and other IPM control methods.

3.7.3 Significance

Pesticides and herbicides are not a significant contaminant source of concern in these watersheds. The major areas of pesticide application in the county are not in the study watershed area. Discussions with several agency staff indicate that pesticides and herbicides, when used, are applied sparingly. No pesticides or herbicides have been detected in the raw water for the SCWD at their diversions.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-30 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

3.8 Wildlife 3.8.1 Contaminants of concern

Wildlife may pose a threat of contamination to public water supplies under certain conditions. The likeliest condition is the contact between water supply sources and animal or waterfowl waste. The potential for transmission of waterborne pathogens such as Giardia cysts and Cryptosporidium oocysts varies with fluctuations in wildlife populations. While considered a potential problem, the relative importance is lessened when compared with the impacts of domestic and confined animals.

3.8.2 San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds

The wild animals that have the greatest potential impact in the San Lorenzo Valley and the North Coast watersheds are wild pig, black tailed deer, California ground squirrel, and the other local terrestrial mammals. Wild pig rooting is widespread throughout the region (see paragraph below), including the survey watersheds, often concentrated near water sources. This includes systems that rely on spring sources or small diversions. This may be associated with reported increases in deer and pig populations as residential development encroaches on the wildlands in the county and hunting is, thereby, reduced; however, the wetter-than-normal conditions prevalent during the decade prior to this 2006 watershed sanitary survey may also be contributing to growing populations of the species most closely associated with water-quality issues.

Resource managers generally acknowledge increases in wild pig populations throughout all parts of the county, both inside and outside of the survey boundaries. Where there has been a noticeable increase in wild pig populations, there can be erosion problems caused by the foraging and wallowing habits of this species. NRCS District Conservationist Rich Casale stated that he has seen evidence of pig populations in every part of Santa Cruz County. Balance staff have encountered wild pig and evidence of feeding in upper Majors Creek watershed and in other oak woodlands in Bonny Doon. Cal-Am field staff report substantial evidence of wild pig use in the Bennett Spring watershed near Felton. SLVWD staff reports high levels of activity in the vicinity of their newly constructed intakes, especially the Foreman intake.

California ground squirrels are a minor potential source of sediment, turbidity, and fecal coliform bacteria. Ground squirrels are a source of bank instability in grassland areas and along levees and earthen dam structures. This instability often necessitates

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-31 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds eradication efforts that when done by rodenticides may be a source of chemical contamination to adjacent water sources. In small spring systems, it was noted that occasionally other rodents, like the dusky footed woodrat and deer mice, as well as a variety of lizards may foul water supplies when they die and decompose in water sources. This issue illustrates the need for vigilance on the part of the small-scale water suppliers and spring owners.

3.8.3 Significance

An increase in wild pig populations could potentially create erosion and turbidity problems in the upper San Lorenzo watersheds and in the vicinity of the North Coast water intakes. Deer and other wild animal populations do not appear to have a great potential for contamination of surface waters at this time. This qualitative judgment is based on a general comparison with the significant impacts of sources such as horse stables and stream crossings.

3.9 Quarries/Mine Runoff

There are four quarries in the San Lorenzo River watershed and one quarry in the Liddell Spring watershed that could impact the quality of public drinking water supplies. Mineral extraction in the San Lorenzo River watershed consists of rock, sand, and gravel for the construction and glass industries. The Felton and Quail Hollow Quarries are still active while the Hanson and Olympia Quarries are no longer active. Mining at the Hanson Quarry ceased in 2004, while mining at the Olympia Quarry ceased in 2002. Reclamation is presently underway at the Hanson Quarry but not at the Olympia Quarry. Despite the quarry closures, persistent stormwater problems still exist at the Hanson and Olympia Quarries; Quail Hollow also has had some persistent stormwater problems (Chris Berry, personal communication, 2007). The CEMEX Bonny Doon Quarry in the Liddell Springs watershed is a limestone quarry; CEMEX is presently trying to obtain an expansion permit for mining operations at the quarry. The quarry expansion Environmental Impact Review document is due for public release in the near future, and will present substantial new data for assessment in a subsequent watershed sanitary survey, among other water-quality assessment processes.

The quarries are regulated under California’s Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) and by the County’s Mining Ordinance. The County Mining Ordinance requires that the application package be submitted to the water purveyor in the drainage

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-32 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds area of the quarry. The County inspects the quarries four times each year and the state inspects annually. The County conducts an extensive review each five years. At that time, the County Planning Commission can impose conditions on the quarry as part of the Certificate of Compliance. The Regional Board issues NPDES permits that set limits on contaminants that can be discharged to surface waters from quarries.

3.9.1 Contaminants of concern

Sediment, nitrate, dissolved metals and minerals are all contaminants of concern related to quarry operations. Specifically, quarries are potentially a source of sediment both in the San Lorenzo River watershed and the Liddell Spring watershed. Sediment sourcing to Liddell Spring is due in part to quarry operations and there is an issue of ongoing research and negotiation for the SCWD and CEMEX. Also, increasing nitrate concentrations in Liddell Spring may be related to explosives use at the quarry or other practices in the contributing watershed. The Felton Quarry has historically been a source of dissolved minerals, sulfate, iron, and manganese in moderately elevated concentrations and the Hanson Quarry has had issues with stormwater management over the last several years.

3.9.2 Existing conditions 3.9.2.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed

This section presents existing conditions of the four quarries in the San Lorenzo River watershed. Two quarries are still active (Felton and Quail Hollow) and two are presently inactive (Hanson and Olympia).

Felton Quarry - Felton Quarry, mined by Granite Construction Company, is a 262-acre granite quarry rising in elevation from 550 feet at the eastern edge to 1,550 feet at the northwest corner. The Felton Quarry mineral deposit, a spatially-limited unit of fractured and stained granitic rock (mapped as adamellite, also known as alaskite), is located on the southeastern side of Ben Lomond Mountain. The quarry consists of an active open pit, an asphalt plant, a washwater recirculation system, a polymer clarifier system, and settling ponds. It produces both decomposed granite used in construction

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-33 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds and a stained aggregate marketed as a high-value landscaping rock under the ‘California Gold’ trademark.6

Mining occurs on approximately 85 acres of the site (Carlson, 2005). The quarry has been active since the early 1970s, and has been operated under the present permit for 26 years with an additional 24 years of feasible mining projected. Limestone Brook drains through the center of the site in a southerly direction forming the headwaters of Gold Gulch, which flows east to the San Lorenzo River. Washwater is recirculated and stored in three detention ponds. It is not discharged except during major storm events. Stormwater runoff from the site is also stored in the three on-site detention ponds. Prior to major storm events, water is pumped from the ponds and discharged to Gold Gulch to increase pond capacity for stormwater runoff. The ponds are designed to handle a 2- hour, 100-year storm, providing a median detention time of at least 20 to 40 minutes. During extreme storm events the capacity of the detention ponds is exceeded and stormwater flows out of the ponds to downstream receiving waters. Discharges to surface waters are regulated under an NPDES permit issued by the Regional Board. The quarry submits quarterly discharge reports to the Regional Board.

Granite monitors ground-water and surface-water quality twice each year at a number of monitoring locations. Ground-water levels are measured in nine wells and samples are collected for pH and conductivity. Surface water samples are collected at 16 locations including the settling ponds, springs, Gold Gulch, and Limestone Brook. All samples are analyzed for pH and specific conductance. Selected samples are analyzed for general water quality parameters such as total dissolved solids, calcium, and sulfate. In April 1995, a sample was collected from the effluent of the clarifier and analyzed for the 13 priority pollutant metals. Most of the metals were not detected. Lead and nickel were detected at concentrations well below drinking water standards. High concentrations of sulfate, calcium, iron, and manganese have been detected in the ground-water basins of Limestone Brook and Gold Gulch. County requirements call for developing a set of protective measures should water quality change by more than 20 percent. The Felton Quarry has controlled erosion at the site by revegetation with native plants (Suzanne Smith, personal communication).

6 See Hecht, 1978 for a discussion of the hydrogeologic and weathering conditions which have led to deep weathering and the lightly-stained rock mined at the site.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-34 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

Historically there was concern that the quarry’s operations might affect the water supply of the Forest Lakes Mutual Water Company, as the quarry’s product of partly-weathered rock is part of the source aquifer for the Company’s wells. A hydrogeologic assessment study (Hecht, 1978) showed that there was no impact on ground-water levels; however, the operator drilled a new well for Forest Lakes MWC that provides 18 acre-feet of water to the water district each year. Conditions of approval for the quarry require that if the water supply were to diminish, Granite would be required to provide a new water supply to this purveyor.

Quail Hollow - The Quail Hollow Quarry encompasses 240 acres and is located on Quail Hollow Road near the community of Ben Lomond (Carlson, 2005). Mining is estimated to continue for decades from the present. The Santa Margarita Sandstone is mined for sand which is used in the construction industry; however the Quail Hollow quarry is locally unique in that it also contains fine, industrial grade sand used by the glass industry (Carlson, 2005). The quarry consists of an open pit, a washwater recirculation system, and detention ponds. Graniterock has completed a draft Long Term Management and Maintenance Plans for the conservation areas surrounding the quarry. The Plan is a stipulation of their 1998 Mining Approval and Certificate of Compliance. The purpose of the Plan is to implement the conservation goals of the Habitat Conservation Plan by describing the management and maintenance actions which will be undertaken to meet the stated goals (Carlson, 2005). The quarry is due for a permit review. Some persistent stormwater management issues exist at the Quail Hollow Quarry (Chris Berry, personal communication, 2007).

Hanson Quarry - The Hanson Quarry is a 275-acre quarry in the Bean Creek watershed mining the Santa Margarita sandstone. The quarry consists of an open pit, a washwater recirculation system, a polymer clarifier system, and four settling ponds. Operations at this facility ceased in 2004. Reclamation of the site is currently in implementation and it could take as much as 30 years to meet the revegetation goals of the Reclamation Plan (Carlson, 2005). Despite being in the reclamation stage, stormwater management of the quarry continues to be an ongoing problem. If future funding comes through, it is possible that the former quarry pit could be used as a recharge facility in association with a larger conjunctive use ground-water program for the lower San Lorenzo River. The conjunctive use project has been developed by the County and surrounding water agencies. Funding for this project has still not been secured. In addition, the Hanson

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-35 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

Quarry contains some preserved sandhills habitat and as such is considered a candidate for habitat conservation purposes. At this point, preliminary discussions between the owners, permitting agencies, and the Trust for Public Land have occurred regarding a possible purchase and transfer of quarry property into public ownership for habitat conservation purposes (Carlson, 2005).

Olympia Quarry - Olympia Quarry occupies 210 acres. The quarry consists of an open pit, wash water recirculation system, sand loading facilities, and a detention pond. Operations were discontinued at this facility in 2002. Reclamation and revegetation of the site is on hold pending ruling from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service with regards to two on-site endangered species – the Mt. Hermon June beetle and the Zayante band-winged grasshopper (Carlson, 2005). As with the Hanson Quarry, the Olympia Quarry is a candidate site for the ground-water conjunctive use project discussed above and the quarry contains some preserved sandhills habitat. As such, it is considered a candidate for habitat conservation purposes. At some point within the last few years, the owners, permitting agencies, and a private group were discussing the possibility of developing Olympia Quarry into a mitigation bank. Presently, we are unaware of further developments on this front (Carlson, 2005).

3.9.2.2 Loch Lomond Reservoir and the upper Newell Creek watershed

There are no quarries in this watershed.

3.9.2.3 North Coast Watersheds

Bonny Doon Quarry - The Bonny Doon Quarry, recently purchased by CEMEX, is located immediately upslope and upwatershed of the SCWD Liddell Spring intake. Quarry operations started in August 1970 and are presently operating under a Certificate of Compliance and Reclamation Plan approved in 1997 (Carlson, 2005). CEMEX has recently proposed expansion of quarrying activities through a Mining Plan Amendment to the County of Santa Cruz; the proposed mining amendment project Environmental Impact Report (EIR) should be released to the public in the very near future. The Reclamation Plan and Certificate of Compliance are tied to the EIR.

The quarry operation includes an open pit, shop, office building, crusher, and a conveyor belt. Approximately 97 acres is mined for limestone to the 750 foot elevation.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-36 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

Approximately 150 tons of rock are mined each year using ammonium nitrate as a blasting agent.

Engineering Science developed an erosion control plan for the quarry. All disturbed sites that are not active are hydromulched annually. Rainfall that falls directly on the active quarry during a storm event either stays in the quarry floor depression or cascades down the steep slopes to the west; some of this runoff enters the settling basins located west of the active quarry pit. CEMEX has had occasional stormwater problems as their settling basins have overflowed to the East Branch of Liddell Creek resulting in sediment delivery to that system. Rainfall which is retained onsite either eventually percolates or evaporates. Storm runoff upstream of the quarry is diverted around the quarry in a series of drainage ditches to four settling ponds downstream of the active quarry and the Liddell Spring intake. The three older ponds are designed for a 10-year, 2-hour storm event. The new pond is designed for a 10-year, 6-hour event. Some drainage may spill out of the ditches and flow towards the intake during large storms.

Increased turbidity and nitrate concentrations at Liddell Spring have been attributed to quarry operations by SCWD. Turbidity impacts to Liddell Spring water quality is a topic of much ongoing work by both the SCWD and CEMEX. Several technical reports have been recently completed and more are underway by both Balance Hydrologics (Chartrand and Hecht, 2005) and P.E. LaMoreaux & Associates (2005a and b). In 2006, it was shown that quarry blasting can generate turbidity signals at Liddell Spring regardless of season (i.e. turbidity signals due to quarry blasting have been recorded in the winter, wet season and the summer, dry season). More than 50% of the blasting- related turbidity signals during the 2006 calendar year were below the threshold of water quality concern for the SCWD. However, eight blast events from May 1st through September 30th, 2006 resulted in the SCWD turning Liddell Spring out to the East Branch of Liddell Creek because turbidity caused by the blast exceeded their treatment capacity at the Water Treatment Facility. Those eight blasts represent 29% of the total blasts during that period that resulted in a turbidity response at Liddell Spring. From blasts conducted in August and September 2006, it has also become evident that blasting at locations near to a locally mapped fracture or fault line trace within the active quarry floor (Pacific Geotechnical Engineering and Balance Hydrologics, 2002) and believed to be hydrologically connected to Liddell Spring can result in turbidity signals at Liddell Spring which exceed the SCWD treatment capacity. This new data supports the

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-37 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds conclusion that blast-related turbidity impacts to Liddell Spring are somewhat dependent on blasting location. This finding, concluded by both the SCWD and CEMEX, demonstrates a hydrologic connection between quarrying activities and Liddell Spring.

Nitrate sources have been previously reported upgradient of the quarry (Watkins- Johnson, 1992). The same study also reports that the quarry area ground-water was affected by nitrate before the commencement of quarry operations. Time-series data dating back to the 1970’s indicates a slight upward trend in background nitrate concentrations of Liddell Spring discharge. The source(s) of nitrate which reaches Liddell Spring, if it is indeed increasing, has however not yet been identified.

3.9.3 Significance

At present, it has been confirmed by both the SCWD and CEMEX that blasting at Bonny Doon Quarry does impact water quality of Liddell Spring – a similar conclusion has yet to be agreed to by both parties with regards to hypothesized impacts from general mining activities (i.e. mining marble located directly upslope from Liddell Spring). During calendar year 2006, more than 50% of the blasting-related turbidity signals at Liddell Spring were below the threshold of water quality concern for the SCWD; however, during the summer of 2006, 29% of all blasting events which triggered turbidity responses at Liddell Spring resulted in signals which exceeded the SCWD’s water quality threshold. These and other results confirm a hydrologic and water quality connection between quarry blasting and Liddell Spring with some dependence on blasting location. Possible nitrate impacts to Liddell Spring discharge from blasting in the quarry pit, if any, have yet to be determined.

Within the four quarries in the San Lorenzo watershed, occasional heavy sedimentation occurs because of exceedance of settling pond capacities during major storms. This condition is not likely to change in the foreseeable future.

3.10 Solid and Hazardous Waste Disposal Facilities

In California, there are three main categories of waste disposal facilities: (1) solid waste disposal facilities, (2) hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) facilities, and (3) illegal dump sites. Solid waste facilities are regulated by the State Integrated Waste Management Board, although pollution problems are handled by the Regional

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-38 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

Boards. Hazardous waste facilities are overseen by the State Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). The County removes trash and abandoned articles from illegal dump sites.

There is one closed solid waste facility in the San Lorenzo River watershed, discussed below. A review of the DTSC database of TSD facilities showed there are no TSD facilities in any of the watersheds.

3.10.1 Contaminants of concern

Leachate from waste disposal facilities is a liquid formed as infiltrating rainwater seeps through the landfilled material mobilizing a variety of contaminants. Leachate is typically a highly mineralized liquid containing heavy metals, dissolved solids, nutrients, and organic chemicals. The composition of leachate from any particular landfill will depend on the nature of the decomposing landfilled materials. Although regulations aim to minimize or eliminate leachate from contaminating the underlying groundwater and nearby surface waters, complete leachate control is difficult to achieve.

3.10.2 Existing conditions 3.10.2.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed

There are no active solid waste disposal facilities in the watershed. The County provides trash pick-up service in all the watersheds and transports the material to one of the two operating landfills, both of which are outside the watershed areas for this study.

There is one closed County landfill, the former Ben Lomond Landfill. This facility was in operation since the early 1950s and was classified first as a Class II Landfill, then later as a Class III Landfill. The landfill ceased acceptance of waste in July 1991 and it is now used as a transfer station and recycling center and is known as the Ben Lomond Transfer Station. It is located on the north side of Newell Creek, downstream of Loch Lomond, in the highly permeable Santa Margarita sandstone which is underlain in this area by the south-southeast dipping Monterey shale.

Requirements for management of active landfills, closure of landfills, and air and water quality testing are described under Subchapter 15 of the California Code of Regulations. The State Integrated Waste Management Board implements source reduction and recycling requirements, waste handling and landfill design, and waste disposal

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-39 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds standards. Landfills are to be designed and closed to permit no off-site movement of leachate. Both active and inactive solid waste disposal sites are required to conduct monitoring specifically to identify the content of any leachate leaving the site and whether there are water quality problems posed by the site. The monitoring results are reported to the Regional Board in Solid Waste Assessment Test (SWAT) reports.

In 1976, the County monitored Newell Creek upstream and downstream of the landfill as well as monitoring a seep into Newell Creek which was downgradient of the landfill and would be expected to intercept any leachate movement. The samples were analyzed for conventional parameters and nutrients. No significant differences between the three surface water sites were seen and leachate contamination was not judged to be significant (Santa Cruz County, 1977).

Water quality problems were later recognized, not from the leachate, but from exposure of the Monterey shale to the atmosphere as a result of landfill excavating activities. Runoff from the wetted Monterey shale contained high levels of naturally occurring cadmium. At one point, lime was spread on the exposed shale in an effort to reduce the cadmium concentrations. This was not sufficiently successful, however, and a clay cover was installed in 1982-83 on the landfill areas which had reached capacity. Thereafter, clay was used as intermediate cover on active areas until the landfill, having reached capacity, was closed (Santa Cruz County Planning Department, July 1981).

The entire Ben Lomond Landfill is now under a clay cover. Regional Board staff report this cover has been effective in reducing the cadmium levels. Closure measures include gas extraction, installation of a sedimentation basin, and installation of a drainage system. The County submitted a closure plan to the Regional Board in 1996.

Monitoring wells were first installed around the perimeter of the landfill in late 1987. Ground-water samples collected from these monitoring wells showed the presence of elevated levels (i.e. over background) of organic and inorganic compounds. Most constituents were detected at low levels. Three volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were detected at levels which exceeded their respective MCLs. These were benzene; cis- 1,2 dichloroethene; and 1,4-dichlorobenzene (Emcon Associates, October 1989).

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-40 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

Additional monitoring wells were installed and a quarterly monitoring program was begun. Analyses are conducted for total dissolved solids, sodium, chloride, nitrates, iron, phenols, chemical oxygen demand, and VOCs. VOCs have not been detected in the downgradient monitoring wells installed close to Newell Creek, between the landfill and the creek. In addition, monthly monitoring of Newell Creek upstream and downstream of the landfill has been conducted since mid-1988. Surface water samples are analyzed for cadmium, pH, turbidity, color, iron, chloride, and sodium (Santa Cruz County Department of Public Works, 1995).

In summary, there is a ground-water plume beneath the Ben Lomond Landfill but concentrations of most monitored constituents are at low levels. A few VOCs are detected above MCLs in three of the wells close to the landfill perimeter. Downgradient groundwater monitoring wells, however, show no evidence of VOC contamination. Monitoring of Newell Creek shows some increases in mean constituent concentrations from upstream to downstream of the landfill, including an apparent increase in turbidity. Leachate inflow into Newell Creek would be unlikely to cause the turbidity increase; this apparent increase may have some other source, possibly erosion within the Rancho Rio subdivision on the opposite creek bank.

3.10.2.1 North Coast Watersheds and the Loch Lomond Reservoir

There are no identified and no permitted waste disposal facilities in any of the other watershed areas.

3.10.3 Significance

Waste disposal facilities most likely are not a significant threat to the water quality of the San Lorenzo River or the creeks in the North Coast watershed. There are no hazardous waste disposal facilities in any of the watersheds. The closed Ben Lomond Landfill in the Newell Creek watershed appears to have created a low-concentration groundwater plume with a few elevated VOCs but the plume does not appear to be migrating into the creek. There is an apparent turbidity increase in the creek from upstream to downstream of the landfill. The landfill leachate, however, is unlikely to be the source of this turbidity increase. Only a few small illegal roadside dump sites were seen during the field survey.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-41 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

3.11 Timber Harvests/Logging

Logging is part of the land-use mosaic and tradition in Santa Cruz Mountains. Most old-growth redwood had been cut by 1915. Douglas fir and hardwoods have also been extensively logged. Timber harvests continue as an integral part of the local economy.

Timber harvests occur throughout the surveyed watersheds, but primarily in the San Lorenzo Valley. Virtually all portions of this watershed are affected. A compilation of permitted timber harvests in the San Lorenzo Valley (Appendix C) developed by SLVWD staff shows that 4,554 acres of the 71,900 acres in the watershed – or about 6.4 percent -- were likely harvested commercially during the six years of 2001 through 2006. This is equivalent to about 10 percent of the watershed, allowing for watershed lands or parks from which commercial harvesting is excluded.

3.11.1 Contaminants of concern

Timber harvesting is responsible primarily for the contribution of additional sediment through erosion from logging roads. With the sediment, nutrients and bacteria are also introduced into the streams. The relationship between timber harvesting and sediment yield is poorly defined and related to specific site conditions including geology, slope, and stream proximity as well as specific timber harvesting practices. Limited local studies have been conducted to measure effects of erosion from timber harvesting roads.7 One field-based study in the Zayante, Newell, and Love Creek watersheds (Swanson and Dvorsky, 2001), suggests that roads related to timber entry (past and present) are sources for perhaps 30 to 50 percent of sediment delivered to the creek system, with values differing substantially by (a) subwatershed, (b) sandy vs. non-sandy soils, and (c) inner gorge versus hillslope location.8 Similarly, no local data are available addressing the relationship of timber harvests and road construction in general (as well as other surface-disrupting activities) on dissolved organic carbon, a constituent of concern in water treatment.

7 The County Planning Department once applied for and was awarded a 205j grant to study this issue, but could not find a landowner willing to cooperate in field monitoring,. The grant funds were returned to the state. 8 Values are approximate, as the study area considered in this report is not truly representative of the two surveyed watershed, but these findings are both important and applicable; see their table ES-1.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-42 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

3.11.2 Existing conditions

Logging is a major land-use activity in all the watersheds. Nearly half the County is zoned for timber production. The percent of the watershed area zoned for timber production would be comparable to or perhaps greater than the County as a whole. Logging is done of both hardwoods (mostly for firewood) and redwoods and Douglas fir (for lumber). Virtually all logging in the watershed study area is on privately owned lands. During the past 10 years, the City of Santa Cruz has discontinued timber harvesting. The San Lorenzo Valley Water District has sold much of its timberlands to Sempervirens Fund and has policies against harvesting on remaining watershed lands; The Lompico County Water District does not engage in timber harvests. Much of the Timber Production Zone (TPZ) land, which is land designated as suitable for commercial logging, is owned by individuals with relatively small acreages. Only a few private companies and the SCWD own TPZ lands in areas greater than 2,500 acres. Thus, the location of logging changes every year, depending on the decisions of many individual land owners and the price of timber. Some TPZ lands are retired from timber harvesting, particular those in public ownership. Conservation groups (e.g., Sempervirens Fund and Save the Redwoods) continue to purchase forested acreage, retiring it from timber production. Some smaller water purveyors continue to sell timber (see Appendix C). Logging is not allowed in the State or County parks.

On private lands, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) is responsible for regulating timber harvesting by enforcing the regulations of the 1973 California Forest Practice Act, contained in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. The logging season is generally April 15 through October 15, but tree- cutting may continue all year long, and CDF may approve winter operations. Prior to 1983, counties could regulate timber harvesting within their county area. Then, SB856 prohibited local regulation and reserved jurisdiction to the state under the CDF. At that time, special County rules were incorporated into the Forest Practice Act.

The basic structure of the CDF requirements are:

1. A Sustained Yield Plan is required for TPZ lands greater than 2,500 acres, describing the attributes of the timber and how the land will be managed to sustain the land as a productive timber area producing a certain number of board feet per year. The SCWD has developed a timber management plan which is similar to a sustained yield plan for its TPZ lands in the Loch Lomond,

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-43 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

Laguna Creek, and Zayante Creek watersheds, but has discontinued harvests. This plan is discussed further in Section 4.

2. A Timber Harvest Plan (THP) is required for each specific project on all parcels if the product is to be sold. The plan submitter must retain a registered professional forester (RPF) to prepare the THP. The skill of the RPF directly affects the water-quality effects of each cut. Actual logging is usually put out for bid to logging companies. THPs are discussed in some detail below.

3. Certain exemptions from the THP process are allowed. Parcels less than 3 acres do not require a THP but must abide by cutting standards and other requirements for the CDF district. Exemptions from the THP requirement are also allowed for Christmas tree cutting, and removal of dead or diseased trees, removal of trees within 150 feet of a residence for fire control. Clear cutting for conversion to other land uses (such as orchards or vineyards) can be done. However, this practice now requires a report from a registered professional forester and CDF now inspects to verify conversion.

The THP process is the functional equivalent of preparing an EIR under CEQA. The THP, once filed and approved, is good for 3 years. Two one-year extractions may be granted by the director of the CDF.

Once the plan submitter files the THP, CDF staff at the region office review the THP for completeness. If it is found to be complete, it is sent to the district CDF office. The THP is then reviewed in the field during the Pre-Harvest Inspection (PHI). The entire Review Team has the opportunity to attend the PHI. The potential members of this multi- disciplinary review team consists of: a CDF staff forester, a representative of the Regional Board, a representative of the County, a representative from the Department of Fish and Game (DFG), a representative from the regional Coastal Commission office (for a THP in the coastal zone), a representative from the California Department of Parks and Recreation (SDP) when THPs which could affect values related to State Parks.

The local water purveyor holding an interest in the watershed of a THP acts as advisor to the Review Team. The California Geological Survey, or CGS, (formerly California Division of Mines and Geology, CDMG) also acts as advisor to the Review Team upon request by CDF; as implied by the advisory role, the extent to which technical advice from purveyors or CGS practitioners is discretionary. The Director may also request other State, Federal, or County agencies to act as advisors to the Review Team.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-44 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

The findings of the PHI are finalized at the final Review Team Meeting (RTM). Any changes resulting from the PHI or from public input are made part of the THP.

The public is notified by both the plan submitter and CDF of relevant information and dates, through direct mailing to neighbors (within one thousand feet of the property) and publishing in the local newspaper. The properties are also posted. Public hearings are held by CDF, and responses are generated to all issues received through the public hearing or written correspondence. A new administrative process of non-industrial timber harvest plans (NTHPs) has been established allowing recurrent entry to smaller private holding on a sustain-yield basis without public notice or review, but subject to continuing CDF oversight.

The County Board of Supervisors has the authority to challenge the approval of a THP by appealing the issue to the State Board of Forestry. The Board of Forestry has the authority to overturn the approval of a timber harvest plan.

District requirements, which the THPs must show they meet, include conformance with cutting standards, return cycle cutting, slash treatment, road construction and design, and post-logging erosion-control measures. The San Lorenzo River and North Coast watersheds are in CDF’s southern subdistrict of the Coast Forest District. Cutting standards for this District allow only selective harvesting. The registered professional forester determines the level of cut within District standards and marks individual trees. Portions of the North Coast watersheds are in Coastal Zone special treatment areas and must comply with additional rules. A specific area may be logged no more than once every 10 years. All slash must be cut to rest a maximum of 18 inches off the forest floor.

Permanent, seasonal, and temporary roads are the three categories of roads recognized by CDF. Permanent roads are asphalted or otherwise surfaced. Seasonal roads are dirt roads on which erosion control features must be installed by October 15. Temporary roads are physically destroyed or blocked after the logging. Most road construction in the watersheds for timber harvesting is of seasonal roads. Road building plans must be discussed in detail in the THP including use of soil generated during the road building. The THP must identify the installation of erosion control features for roads, such as water bars. Water bars are a swale/berm combination that cut across roads to act as a cross drains. Additional erosion control features include construction of outfacing

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-45 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds slopes (outsloping) on roads, avoiding inside slope drainage, and “armoring” susceptible areas to dissipate energy from storm flow.

Post-disturbance erosion control is site specific. The application of straw, wood chips, hydromulch, slush, or fabrics to a skid road or other feature is dependent on such factors as slope, proximity to a watercourse, rating of the watercourse as to sensitivity, and professional judgment. Since the early 1990s, stream crossings have received particular attention and care, with respect to not only inhibiting sediment delivery during washouts but also protecting adult passage of salmonids.

CDF requires that erosion-control features be maintained for an additional 1 to 3 years after completion of the first winter after harvest. CDF staff inspect a logging operation a minimum of three times: before, during, and after the harvest. However, they can and do inspect more frequently if appropriate. After the harvest is closed, CDF inspects the roads during the extended maintenance period. Beyond this period CDF cannot control any subsequent destruction or non-maintenance of the roads.

3.11.3 Significance

The cumulative impact of timber harvests, both at individual sites and cumulatively on downstream channels, must be considered significant. The primary potential problem arises with erosion resulting from the roads constructed to access the logging area, particularly after CDF oversight ceases and erosion control measures may not be maintained. CDF requirements do not limit road density within a watershed. NOAA fisheries uses road density (measured as the ratio of miles of road per square mile (mi./sq. mi.) of watershed) as an indicator of watershed conditions in salmonid habitat assessments. NOAA fisheries has found that road densities greater than 3 mi./sq. mi. may indicate impaired ecosystem function (NMFS, 1996). In addition, Swanson (2001) found that legacy and current logging roads are the source of 30 to 50 percent of sediment delivered to the Zayante Creek. If extended throughout the sanitary survey study areas, as is reasonable based on underlying soils and geology, Swanson’s study compels attention

The relative significance of these old logging roads will depend not just on original road design and construction but on the maintenance of erosion control features and the slope and type of underlying soils and geologic conditions. The watersheds contain many

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-46 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds geologic formations and unconsolidated colluvial and slope deposits which differ markedly in the degree of erodibility. ‘Colluvial wedge’ failures (slipouts of the soils filling steep draws or swales) and small landslides which displace a segment of logging road are endemic to the Santa Cruz Mountains. These are of particular concern for protecting water supplies (and spawning habitat) because the toes of the failure often are deposited directly into a stream or its riparian zone, where they continue to contribute sediment and turbidity for long after the streams would otherwise run clear. These slope failures are recurrently repaired for temporary entry, and tend to fail again during the next severe winter, resulting in a cycle that cumulatively results in persistence of turbidity following individual storms or over several years which affects divertibility and the quality of water diverted. Additional attention to road failures, and their underlying geologic or geotechnical causes, could help alleviate both the magnitude and persistence of turbidity in the San Lorenzo watershed. Another major regional challenge especially specific to the San Lorenzo watershed (and adjoining catchments to the northwest and southeast) is to reduce sediment delivery from erosion of road treads. Deep, multi-branched gully systems tend to develop on roads cut into weathered slopes within (especially) the Vaqueros and Butano sandstones. The gullies are left to continue growing, or are temporarily filled during re-opening of harvest areas only to re-erode with the next wet season. While not limited to the Santa Cruz Mountains, this set of issues is particularly manifested in the local setting. Means of controlling such erosion in this ‘sugar sand’ setting have yet to be specified or enforced. This could be usefully addressed in a rigorous control-measure focused study of intermittently-open roads in such watersheds as Logan Creek (and upper Kings Creek generally), Newell Creek, or Hare Creek where weathered Vaqueros sandstone is widespread. An appropriate set of practices for Southern District lands underlain by such geology may serve to measurably diminish sediment delivery and turbidity, and including sedimentation of Loch Lomond – one of the subwatersheds with the largest acreage of land managed for timber (Appendix C).9

9 This would be a logical extension of prior grants obtained by the County to prepare a new manual for road maintenance practices to reduce erosion and sedimentation (completed) and an inventory of potential sediment sources along County roads in the San Lorenzo Watershed (completed).

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-47 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

3.12 Recreation

Principal recreational activities in the watersheds include swimming, fishing, hiking, and horseback riding. Along with hiking and horseback riding, mountain biking also occurs on trails in the watersheds. Water contact recreation (swimming) occurs primarily during fair weather and relatively warm temperature conditions, conditions typical of May through October. The peak water-contact recreation season is traditionally from the Memorial Day through the Labor Day weekend. In addition, weekend use is generally more intensive than weekday use. Swimming and wading has been listed as the most popular recreational activity in the watersheds. Hiking, mountain biking, and horseback riding are more year-round activities (County General Plan).

3.12.1 Contaminants of concern

Water-contact recreation is a potential source of viruses, pathogens, and bacteria, principally from the introduction of human fecal matter (most likely from infants and children) directly into the stream. Hiking, mountain biking, and particularly horseback riding, can contribute to erosion and increased turbidity, especially where conducted off established trails and at stream crossings. Fishing activity is limited to catch-and-release steelhead, except at Loch Lomond, and is unlikely to be a source of contaminants..

3.12.2 Existing conditions 3.12.2.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed

There are three state parks, four county parks, one City recreation area, one private country club, and several public and private swimming holes within the watersheds. Water contact recreation is prohibited in the City recreation area but is widespread elsewhere in the creek system. The state parks include Castle Rock State Park, the Henry Cowell State Park, and a small portion of the Big Basin Redwoods State Park. The state parks are essentially open spaces. Big Basin Redwoods State Park has more than 18,000 acres with many miles of trails for hiking, biking, and horseback riding, 147 developed campsites, 6 trail camps, and 36 tent cabins. Castle Rock State Park has more than 5,000 acres and 32 miles of trails for hikers and equestrians. Camping is for backpackers only. Henry Cowell State Park consists of two units; a main park area of about 1,800 acres and the Fall Creek Unit which has about 2,500 acres and has about 20

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-48 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds miles of trails. Some trail sections are designated for horses, leashed dogs, or bicycles but most trails are for hiking. There is also a 112-unit campground.

The County parks include the Felton Covered Bridge County Park (playground, covered bridge, horse trail access, volleyball); Highlands County Park ( senior center, swimming pool, picnicking, playing fields, nature trail); Ben Lomond Mill Street Park (picnicking, small playing field); and Quail Hollow Ranch County Park (equestrian facility).

The Boulder Creek Golf and Country Club is a private facility which provides an 18-hole golf course as well as other recreational facilities, such as tennis courts and a swimming pool.

There are several small dams constructed across creeks to afford summer swimming holes at various locations. These include, among others, San Lorenzo Woods, Bear Creek Scout Camp, Gold Gulch in Forest Lakes, and Zayante Creek in Mt. Hermon. The County Health Services Agency has monitored fecal coliform bacteria along the creek system and uses the data to issue health advisories against swimming, when coliform counts are high. The fecal coliform data can indicate sewage contamination from failing septic systems, urban runoff, domestic animal wastes, wildlife, birds, and/or water contact recreation itself.

An examination of the geographical distribution of the County fecal coliform data shows that the urbanized portions of the river system, generally between Boulder Creek and Felton, have fairly similar average and median values. There is an apparent trend of decreasing coliform counts through reaches that pass through the State Parks, which are mostly open space. SCWD total coliform data also suggest the mitigating effects of Henry Cowell State Park, as well as the City’s reservoir at Loch Lomond. That is, total coliform counts at Loch Lomond and the Tait Street diversion are lower than the counts at the Felton Diversion. The County’s wastewater management program evaluation found no significant increases of fecal coliform bacteria in the swimming areas of the San Lorenzo River system, indicating that water contact recreation at parks and designated recreation areas is not a significant source of the bacterial load in the river (John Ricker, personal communication, 2007).

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-49 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

3.12.2.2 Loch Lomond Reservoir and the upper Newell Creek watershed

Loch Lomond Recreation Area occupies the east side of the reservoir and is owned and operated by the SCWD. Recreational use averages around 55,000 visitors per year. There is day use only, with picnicking, fishing, and boating as the primary activities. Only electric powered boats and manually paddled boats such as rowboats are allowed. There is no water contact recreation allowed. Wastewater is trucked out of the recreation area and virtually no pesticides or herbicides are used in the area. The park is open from March 1 to September 15 from 6 AM roughly to sunset (varying times).

3.12.2.3 North Coast Watersheds

There are no designated recreation areas or regional parks in the North Coast watersheds. There are informally established horse trails in the watersheds.

3.12.3 Significance

Many recreational activities are relatively benign and non-polluting. Large recreational areas, especially those which are mostly open space like Henry Cowell State Park, or are managed specifically for water quality such as the Loch Lomond Recreation Area, appear to enhance water quality. As discussed above, bacterial water quality appears to improve as the water passes through large open space parks (Henry Cowell State Park) or resides in a reservoir for extended periods (Loch Lomond Reservoir).

Recreational activities generally considered of most significance involve water contact recreation. However, an evaluation of the County fecal coliform bacteria data, conducted by the County Health Services Agency, found no significant increase in bacteria in the swimming areas of the San Lorenzo River system. The potential for erosion from horseback riding and the introduction of fecal matter from horses may be significant, especially at stream crossings, as discussed previously.

3.13 Unauthorized Activity

Unauthorized activities in the project area include unpermitted grading and residential development, illegal timber harvests, and unauthorized dumping of solid and liquid wastes. These activities are found at varying levels throughout the San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast watersheds.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-50 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

Road building and land clearing is a problem associated with mountain residential developments throughout the area. Area resource managers find that land clearing, road construction, and maintenance by individual landowners are the primary sources of avoidable erosion. Many of the more problematic roads and stream crossings have been constructed informally, without the benefit of County or DFG review.

3.13.1 Contaminants of concern

Generally, sediment caused by eroding land is the primary contaminant of concern. Illegal dumping of solid and liquid trash and household chemicals is potentially a contaminant of concern. The latter source is not currently found to be significant in the watersheds.

3.13.2 San Lorenzo River Watershed

The transition from summer to year-round occupancy in the San Lorenzo Valley resulted in heavier traffic loads on unimproved roads during the winter months. The use of both newly constructed and older dirt roads in periods of winter rains is the most consistent source of sedimentation and turbidity.

Numerous violations of the Santa Cruz County Erosion Control Ordinance can be seen throughout the subject watersheds, primarily in connection with roads. These violations typically involve the movement of at least 100 cubic yards of material; amounts less than 100 cubic yards do not fall under the purview of County Resource Planners, except where associated with building or development permits. County Planning Department staff estimate that in the project area, there are scores of "active" violations of the County Grading and Erosion Control, the Riparian Habitat Protection, and the Sensitive Habitats Protection Ordinances. In addition, several large illegal roads in the Bear Creek and King Creek watersheds remain open and are a significant source of sediment and persistent turbidity.

Among streams that have notable impacts caused by sedimentation are upper Deer Creek, Kings Creek, and Bear Creek. Several smaller tributaries of Bear Creek may show impacts of unauthorized activities, including Hopkins Gulch, Whalebone Gulch, and Harmon Gulch. Non-permitted activities are responsible for some, but not necessarily, all of these effects.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-51 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

Diffuse sediment sources are prevalent in the San Lorenzo Valley. Some of these diffuse sources are caused by landowners performing intermittent and non-permitted grading. While Santa Cruz County has several ordinances that address riparian habitat protection and grading and erosion control, the number of backlogged and new violations can overwhelm enforcement staff. Older, sometimes major, violations are left unresolved as new complaints are made and demand attention.

Besides grading and brush clearing by individual landowners, unpermitted timber harvests for firewood occasionally occur in the watersheds. Illegal timber harvests are seen by resource managers as causing more aesthetic damage than water supply damage.

Other unauthorized activities that may have an adverse impact on water quality are associated with homeless encampments in and around the San Lorenzo River from the Highway 1 bridge to Paradise Park. The upper portion of this corridor is upstream of the Tait Street intake, the downstream limit of the survey area. The wooded riparian area just upstream of the Tait Street Diversion is chronically used as an informal settlement. While it is apparent that such occupation exists, it is difficult to estimate the actual impact. Because there is a lack of sanitary facilities in the vicinity of the encampments, these sites may be a source of human waste. While source assessment studies have not specifically identified these areas as major contributors to bacteria contamination in the San Lorenzo River (Ricker and Peters, 2006), periodic differences in bacteria levels between the upstream Sycamore Grove station and Tait Street suggest an influence of encampments, agriculture and/or swimming.

3.13.3 Loch Lomond Reservoir subwatershed

While the upper Newell Creek watershed is sparsely populated, a number of rural residential parcels have been developed. Formerly almost inaccessible, this area was cited by County resource planners as an area to watch. Old roads have been regraded to provide better access for the few households that have taken hold.

3.13.4 North Coast Watersheds

County enforcement staff indicated that numerous violations of the grading and erosion control ordinances, sensitive habitat protection ordinance, and timber harvest plans occur in the North Coast area. Sedimentation of Majors Creek has been cited as

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-52 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds evidence of a general trend towards erosion and illegal grading. Although the general consensus was that violations are widespread throughout the subject watersheds and will continue, legacy logging roads are still considered the primary sediment source.

3.13.5 Significance

Unauthorized activities are significant sources of sediment from eroding property in the watersheds. Small-scale grading and timber harvest frequently use poor practices which lead to barren, unprotected roads, yards, etc. Finally, homeless encampments can increase the concentration of microbial and particulate contaminants in streams.

3.14 Vehicle Upsets and Spills

Vehicle upsets are potential sources of contamination of hazardous materials into surface waters through the spilling or rupturing and subsequent discharge of the materials being transported. In addition to spilling of any cargo being carried, collisions can release petroleum products from the vehicles themselves. Factors that affect the level of risk for vehicle spills include overall traffic volume, amount of hazardous materials being transported, highway characteristics, and road conditions. There are no prohibitions on the transport of hazardous materials within the study area watershed.

There are two major transportation routes suited for heavy vehicles, both in the San Lorenzo River watershed. State Highway 9 is the major traffic route through the San Lorenzo Valley, while State Highway 17 skirts the eastern edge of the San Lorenzo watershed (see Plate 1). There are no major transportation routes in the North Coast watersheds. Empire Grade Road skirts the east boundary – and the west boundary of the San Lorenzo River watershed -- but is not as heavily traveled as Highways 9 and 17. The risk for spills is generally present, but the specific combination of factors which would produce a significant spill from a traffic accident is both rare and unpredictable.

Response protocols to a traffic accident or other surface spill in Santa Cruz County appear to be straightforward and include notification, as appropriate, of downstream water users. A spill is first generally dialed-in to 911 which routes the call to the nearest Fire Department unit. The fire unit pages the County Hazardous Materials Section of the County Environmental Health Services Agency. County staff then preliminarily assess the nature of the contamination, how far it has gone, and whether it has entered a waterway. County staff will then request assistance from the CDFG if a waterway is

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-53 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds affected and will directly notify the downstream water user if appropriate. The County’s Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Plan outlines the various responsibilities of different County Departments in the event of a spill. There have been no spills which have affected waterways within recent times.10 City staff report that timely notification from the County is an ongoing area of concern and is not consistently performed in a functional manner (Chris Berry, personal communication, 2007).

3.14.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed

Within the town of Felton, there are three known ground-water contamination plumes which are seeping into the San Lorenzo River. These are the only sites known to be impacting stream water quality. They are under the jurisdiction of the Regional Board.

3.14.1.1 Valeteria Dry Cleaners (6539 Highway 9)

This site was identified when perchloroethylene (PCE) was detected in the San Lorenzo River in 1985 (0.5 µg/l). Further monitoring tracked the PCE, in 1988, to a spring near this dry cleaner shop. The source was determined to be contamination of soils in the dry cleaner’s septic system and leachfield originating during the 1960s. The owner conducted a remediation which included removal of sludge within the on-site waste disposal system, steam-cleaning the redwood septic tank, and backfilling with sand. The remediation proved insufficient, and the site was re-excavated in 2002 (U.S. EPA, 2002). The leachfield was then relocated and contaminated soil was exported. Further work was not envisioned at the time of the EPA remediation but is reportedly under discussion in 2007 with new owners of the site.

The Felton Diversion, which is about 1 mile downstream of the dry cleaner’s has detected PCE as high as 1.4 µg/L relative to an at-the-tap maximum contaminant level of 5.0 µg/L. PCE has not been detected further downstream at the Tait Street diversion.

3.14.1.2 Chevron Underground Storage Tank Leak (6325 Highway 9)

A ground-water plume beneath this site caused by a leaking underground storage tank, is contaminating a nearby seep to the river. Chevron has installed an interception sump

10 Some years ago, following a spill from a gasoline tanker on Highway 17, County staff went door to door, informing downstream users of Carbonera Creek.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-54 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds which collects the seepage. In the seep, total purgeable hydrocarbons (TPH) has been measured at levels ranging from ND to 74,000 µg/L and benzene has been measured at levels ranging from ND to 5,800 µg/L. During dry weather, this system appears to be effective in intercepting much of the gasoline-contaminated ground water. During long wet periods, however, the effectiveness is limited. Monitoring occurs quarterly. The owner has proposed a revised corrective for the site and for the automotive shop east of Highway 9, which is under review by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (Tom Sayles, personal communication).

3.14.1.3 Sturdy Oil (former Exxon Station) Storage Tank Leak(s) (6225 Graham Hill Road)

The former Exxon Station near the Covered Bridge in Felton reported leaking conditions in 2000. A ground-water cleanup program was initiated, and, following a brief uptick in gasoline and MTBE concentrations in early 2005, this site is now deemed currently in compliance, with ongoing quarterly monitoring (Tom Sayles, Central Coast RWQCB). Cleanup will continue indefinitely. Data from five monitoring wells on and south of the site suggests most contamination is beneath the site and Covered Bridge Road, but may extend slightly south of the road (Hydro Analysis, Inc., 2006). There is no indication that contamination has reached the stream network. The remedial consultant working at the site is scheduled to submit a workplan for additional characterization and correction by February 15, 2007.

3.14.1.4 Other sites with potential plumes

Watkins-Johnson operates an extraction and remediation program at its manufacturing facility next to Bean Creek in western Scotts Valley. Watkins-Johnson used a variety of chemicals in the manufacture of industrial furnaces and electronic parts. Past operations resulted in contamination of the underlying Santa Margarita sandstone with methylene chloride, chloroform, and trichloroethylene (TCE). The plume contributed TCE to Bean Creek. The site is overseen by the EPA and has an ongoing remediation system which consists of several pumping wells and treatment by granular activated carbon (GAC) adsorption. The treated water is considered contaminant-free and is either recharged to the aquifer through a leach field, re-used on-site as non-process cooling water, or discharged to Bean Creek. Approximately 7 million gallons per quarter are discharged to Bean Creek under NPDES Permit No. CA0049077. In addition to monitoring the

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-55 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds treated discharge, Bean Creek is monitored at one upstream and two downstream sites. Contaminants are now non-detectable in Bean Creek.

3.14.2 Other watersheds

No ground-water contamination plumes are known in the other watersheds.

3.14.3 Significance

There is an existing system to report and clean-up traffic accident and other surface spills. Notification of the downstream water user is part of the response process. Remediation actions have occurred at all three ground-water contamination sites and resulted in a lessening of the contaminant levels seeped to the river at two sites, and possibly at the third.

3.15 Geologic Hazards

The two main geologic hazards affecting the quality of drinking water in the study area are earthquakes and landslides. These, along with other infrequent or less challenging geologic hazards, are discussed in this section.

3.15.1 Seismic events

Few areas of the state are as familiar with the effects of an earthquake on public water supply systems as Santa Cruz County. Santa Cruz County purveyors had to repair a substantial number of emergency main breaks and re-sanitize their distribution systems in the days immediately following the 1989 Loma Prieta event. Observed or potential effects on water supply sources include:

Significant changes in the flow of springs — The yield of Liddell Spring reportedly increased to about 8 to 10 mgd for two months following the October 17, 1989 earthquake and returned to normal, less than 2 mgd, in March 1990. The yield of the nearby quarry spring is reported to have doubled. Many other streams and springs in the region reported similar responses.

Source water quality may change — The mineral quality of most of the northern San Lorenzo tributaries changed noticeably following the 1989 event, and seem to be gradually returning to pre-event conditions. The bacterial pathogen levels of any of the

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-56 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds surface sources can potentially change as surface soils and debris are dislodged and enter the stream system. This is particularly a risk with the sources emanating from karstic watersheds. Also, soils and surficial debris can be dislodged by seiches (waves in lakes generated by earthquakes or landslides), and enter Loch Lomond.

Constituent release from reservoir-bottom sediments — While not reported after the 1989 earthquake, other earthquakes could potentially cause the release of gases, pathogens, and oily substances, all of which were observed in Searsville Lake near Palo Alto following the 1906 earthquake (Lawson and others, 1908).

3.15.2 Significance

Seismic events are a significant potential source of contamination and structural damage to existing water supply systems throughout the project area. The ability of treatment plants to anticipate and respond to damage to their own facilities, while also responding to fluctuating water quality and quantity, is a critical factor in the overall management of drinking water in the project area.

3.15.3 Landslides and other major slope instabilities

Landslides are prevalent throughout the Santa Cruz Mountains, and particularly in the San Lorenzo Valley. Nonetheless, the SCWD and other purveyors have been quite successful in maintaining continuity of service and in avoiding the elevated turbidity and other water quality problems associated with landslides upstream of water intakes. This record reflects, in part, an awareness of the chronic landslide hazard which prevails throughout the subject watershed, and the judgment of senior staff of the purveyors in avoiding water sources which are especially prone to landslides. Large slope instabilities, including landslides, do occur periodically within the subject watersheds, and are expected to keep recurring.

Landslides constrain local water systems well beyond concerns over turbidity. Sediment entering the channels limits habitat values, resulting in calls for greater in- stream flow reservations. For example, the sandy material which has been entering Bean Creek for the past 20 years from the Mount Hermon slide does not appear to elevate turbidities either at the Felton Diversion or at Tait Street at low flows, although the sandy sediment does complicate and add to the cost of diversions and causes other critical environmental damage in addition to the related bed sedimentation and loss of

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-57 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds aquatic habitat value. Hence, landslides might be seen as constraining water supplies both when (and just after) they occur as well as during the subsequent period when habitat is impaired downstream -- generally the following spring(s) and summer(s), when water may not be divertible because it is needed to sustain sufficient habitat.

During the past several decades, there have been a number of very large landslides along nearby streams in settings similar to those which prevail near certain intakes. In addition to the Mount Hermon slide, and Bean Creek slides in general, two examples are:

Baldwin Creek — A very large rock fall completely dammed and impounded Baldwin Creek. Based on observations made by project staff in 1968, the rockfall may have occurred during the prior 10 or 20 years. The setting in which this rockfall occurred is very similar geologically to those found near the Majors Creek intake and along Laguna Creek downstream of the intake.

Love Creek Landslide — In January 1982, a landslide occurred in moderately dipping fractured Monterey shales, such as occur upstream of a number of other areas west of Highway 9 between San Lorenzo Valley High School and Boulder Creek.

3.15.4 Weather-related events

Occasional major wind storms or snow falls can introduce a very large amount of organic debris to the watersheds upstream of the intakes. For example, a snowstorm during the first week of January 1974 broke off an astounding number of branches, mainly of oaks and other hardwoods, many of which fell directly into the stream system and decomposed in place. Access to intakes was greatly inhibited for a period of several days to a week or longer.

3.15.5 Significance

Landslide and slope failures are common occurrences in the Santa Cruz Mountains. The greatest potential impact is at points of diversion and immediately upstream. Major landslides may occur as a result of seismic activity and/or rainfall throughout the subject watersheds. Damage to intakes and stream channels in their vicinities may render such facilities inoperable from a period of days to several weeks. In the case of

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-58 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds several smaller purveyors, such an occurrence could prevent the delivery of treated surface water to their service areas.

3.16 Fires

Wildfire has long been both a natural occurrence and land management tool along the coast and in the Santa Cruz Mountains since the earliest inhabitants arrived between 30,000 to 10,000 years ago. Native inhabitants used fire to burn off scrub and grasslands to facilitate acorn gathering and to foster the growth of seed-bearing annuals.

Logging operations in the late 1800's to the early 1900's also relied heavily on fire to reduce slash piles and to clear acreage for conversion to grazing and homesites. Evidence of this can be seen throughout the subject watersheds as fire scars on old growth redwood stumps.

3.16.1 San Lorenzo River Watershed

Fire suppression has been the predominant management strategy in both the San Lorenzo and North Coast watersheds since that era of slash burning. Fire management is the responsibility of the California Department of Forestry, Felton Headquarters. There have been no major wildfires in the last three decades in the subject watersheds.

Several fires occurred in the 1930's and 1940's, with a large fire known as the Sawmill fire in the 1950's. One other fire of note was the Love Creek fire in 1970. Numerous small fires occur every year, yet in total, they have not had much impact on reducing total fuel load. As a result, resource managers in the project area state that suppression of small brushfires and residential fires have created a fuel buildup that will result in a watershed-scale wildfire, if the conditions are right.

To address this potential catastrophe, several land managers have undertaken measures to reduce the chance of major fire, led by CDF. Prescribed burning is done primarily by the California Department of Parks and Recreation at Henry Cowell Redwood State Park and in Big Basin Redwood State Park. These prescribed burns are done for two primary reasons: (1) vegetation management within park boundaries and (2) to reduce the likelihood of fires passing over the park boundaries. Use of prescribed burns is expected to increase over the next five years within the parks (Tim Hyland, personal communication, 2006). Many large forest landowners maintain networks of fire trails

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-59 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds and roads on their properties. The County, and a number of community organizations including the former Fire Safe Council, attempt to extend appropriate measures to willing owners. The potential for a large-scale fire with multi-year consequences for water supply remains.

3.16.2 Loch Lomond Reservoir and the upper Newell Creek watershed

No significant fires were noted in the Loch Lomond watershed since 1959, which burned about 1,000 acres on both sides of the lake. Evidence of this fire can be seen on the east side of the lake, where numerous snags have been left to tower above the regrowth. Prescribed burns have since been discussed by SCWD staff, yet the excessive fuel load poses a significant source of concern. As a result, burning has not been used for vegetation management. Planning for fire control and management is currently an active issue with SCWD, which is upgrading maintenance of fire trails and upgrading coordination with CDF and other wildfire-control agencies.

3.16.3 North Coast Watersheds

Brushfires in the North Coast watersheds have occurred periodically, both by human sources (i.e., arson, prescribed burns) and lightning fires. Like the San Lorenzo Valley, fire suppression has been the predominant management strategy, and major wildfire is potentially a serious threat to surface water supplies. State Parks plans to increase prescribed burning in the upper Majors Creek watershed, on Grey Whale Ranch, especially in the sandy Ponderosa pine sandhills – one of the more fire-prone areas.

3.16.4 Significance

There are three issues related to fire in the subject watershed.

First and foremost, the absence of wildfire throughout the last few decades increases the chance of a major event which could seriously alter surface hydrology and sedimentation in any or all subject water supply streams. Elevated levels of turbidity are likely to persist from several months to several years following an extensive fire. Only part of this time will levels remain elevated above 10 to 30 NTUs, a rule-of-thumb threshold range above which reliable water treatment becomes more challenging. Because turbidities persist much longer in reservoirs than in springs or run-of-the- stream diversions, post-fire turbidity persistence may prove to be more challenging for the SCWD, which draws heavily during summer upon Loch Lomond Reservoir.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-60 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds

Experience with major floods or fires has shown that reservoirs of similar size can remain turbid throughout the summer (or two) following an extensive burn or other disruptive event. Soulajule Reservoir, in Marin County, sustained turbidities in excess of 50 NTU for the entire summer following the January 1982 storm. Data collected following the October 1961 fire in the Uvas Creek headwaters indicate much-increased sediment yields. Uvas was high in sediment following the fire and was not available for use as a municipal water supply for several months following the fire.

Second, fire suppression activities include creation of temporary roads and firebreaks that can be a source of persistent sedimentation and turbidity if not properly abandoned following fire events. Reseeding burned slopes, mulching exposed soils, and the use of other erosion control techniques will reduce, but in no way eliminate the significant erosion likely to follow a wildfire.

Third, fire retardants may also have adverse effects on water quality. Historically, retardants used by CDF have included borate salts (which were long lasting, but also phytotoxic and soil sterilants) and bentonite clay in water, which is less persistent. Use then shifted to ammonium-based fire retardants, which as a group accounted for nearly all chemical retardants used to control wildland fires at the time of the 1996 sanitary survey. These latter materials are still key tools but a new powder-based product (AquaGel-K) d has recently become the dominant material applied by CDF fixed-wing airplanes (Tom Glunt, CDF Sonoma Air Attack Station; Jim Wilkins, CDF Hollister Air Attack Station, personal communications, 2007). The active ingredient in the new gel fire retardant, 2-propenoic acid, is practically non-toxic to aquatic organisms and the material degrades readily in sunlight. In addition to significant lower aquatic toxicity, as compared to the aerially-applied ammonium-based materials and has properties, such as enhanced reflectivity, that increase its effectiveness in combating initial outbreaks

In addition to these retardants, fire engines and helicopters may attack the fire using fire suppressant foams. These fire suppressant foams are more toxic to aquatic biota than the ammonium-based fire retardants (Gaikowski and others, 1996) but application of either type of product requires leaving a buffer between the spray zone and live streams. The two types of fire suppressant foams used are Phos-Chek WD-881, a sulfonate solution plus 2,4-petanediol that is slightly more toxic than Silv-Ex, a mixture of sodium

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-61 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 3 Sanitary Survey Potential Contaminant Sources in the Watersheds and ammonium salts of fatty alcohol ether sulfates and alcohols. The conventional fire retardant, Phos-Chek D75-F, is a mixture of diammonium sulfate, di- and mono- ammonium phosphate, guar gum thickener, and a corrosion inhibitor (i.e., sodium dichromate). While this product is substantially less toxic than WD-881, it still should not be applied over or immediately adjacent to bodies of water in order to avoid fish mortality and elevated levels of nitrogen and eutrophication downstream. Studies by the US Forest Service have shown that the water quality impacts of these materials vary with three elements: the characteristics of the application (i.e., how much dropped and where), the characteristics of the site (steepness, vegetation types, extent of riparian stream cover), and the characteristics of streamflow (higher, turbulent flows result in better mixing, dilution, and reduced toxicity to aquatic life). In general, it can be said that adverse water quality impacts decrease as the distance of application from a stream increases

The inevitability of a major wildfire has been echoed by state, county and local natural resource managers. When a major fire does occur, water resources may suffer immediately and significantly as homes, roads and infrastructure are rebuilt. In subsequent years, the water utilities will likely see a decrease in turbidity and sedimentation, as vegetation becomes re-established and reconstruction activity decreases. Hulda McLean, a former County supervisor and owner of Rancho Los Osos in lower Waddell Creek, emphasized the importance of turbidity persistence after the 1948 Pine Mountain fire by noting that it took five years before Waddell Creek ran clear at any time during the winter months – a lesson on the effects of a watershed-scale fire.

Section 3 03-20-07.doc 3-62 Table 3-1. Santa Cruz Watershed Sanitary Survey Contacts

Category Contact Agency Phone Number Drinking Water Jan Sweigert CA DHS (Monterey) (831) 655-6944 Regulations/Treatment Processes/Quality Control Querube Moltrip CA DHS (Monterey) (831) 655-6936

General Watershed Information Chris Berry SCWD (831) 420-5483 Betsy Herbert SLVWD (831) 430-4627 John Ricker SCCo Environmental Health Services (831) 454-2750 Chris Spohrer CA Parks and Recreation (831) 359-7420

Drinking Water Terry Tompkins SCWD (831) 420-5454 Production/Treatment Jim Mueller SLVWD (831) 338-2153 Andrew Schrader SCCo Environmental Health Services (831) 454-2741 Bill O’Brien Scott's Valley* (831) 335-5260 Mike Eggleston Lompico Water District* (831) 335-5200 Bob Scholle Big Redwood Park MWC* (831) 353-1088 Michael Stus Sequoia Seminar* (831) 336-5060 David Forbes Quaker Center* (831) 336-8333 Tom Rafaeli CalAm* Dale Pollock Mt. Hermon*

* = non participants in this Sanitary Survey Urban Runoff Rachael Fatoohi SCCo (831) 454-3160 Chris Coburn Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (831) 647-4247

Land Use (Agricultural, etc.) Mark Demming SCCo Planning Department (831) 454-3183 John Ricker SCCo Environmental Health Services (831) 454-2750 Lisa LeCoump SCCo Agricultural Commissioner (831) 454-2620 Betsy Herbert SLVWD (831) 430-4627 Richard Casale USDA NRCS (831) 475 1967

Concentrated Animal Facilities John Ricker SCCo Environmental Health Services (831) 454-2750 Chris Berry SCWD (831) 420-5483 Betsy Herbert SLVWD (831) 430-4627 Angela Stuart SCCo RCD (831) 464-2950 Jennifer Harrison Ecology Action (831) 425-1404 David Carlson SCCo Planning Department (831) 454-3173 Angela Carpenter RWQCB (805) 542-4624

Pesticide and Herbicide Use Roy Freer CalTrans - Landscape Specialist (805) 549-3124 Tom Barnett CalTrans - Santa Cruz Area Supt (831) 476-1351 Steve Tjosvold UC Cooperative Extension (831) 763-8040 Bill Ratto SCCo Parks, Open Spaces and Cultural (831) 454-7900 Services Andy Werner SCWD (831) 420-4611 Scott Lang SCWD, Loch Lomond (831) 335-2586 Mary Lou Nicoletti SCCo Agricultural Commissioner (831) 454-2590 Bill Keller Boulder Cr. Golf and Country Club (831) 338-3717

206081 Table 3 1 report contact list 3-26-07.xls; Sheet1 Page 1 of 3 Table 3-1. Santa Cruz Watershed Sanitary Survey Contacts

Category Contact Agency Phone Number Wild Animals Chris Spohrer CA DPR (831) 359-7420 Betsy Herbert SLVWD (831) 430-4627 Scott Lang SCWD, Loch Lomond (831) 335-2586 Chris Berry SCWD (831) 420-5483 Mike Kirshner DFG Warden (Boulder Creek) (831) 338-2783 Kent Aue DFG (415) 209-9439 Lt. Don Kelly DFG (Monterey) (831) 465-9158 Rachel Lather SCCo Public Works (831) 420-5160

Quarries Chris Berry SCWD (831) 420-5483 David Carlson SCCo Planning Department (831) 454-3173 Terry Tompkins SCWD (831) 420-5454 Barry Hecht Balance Hydrologics (510) 704-1000

Solid and Hazardous Waste Disposal Jose DeAnda SCCo Environmental Health Services (831) 454-2022 Facilities Steve Schneider SCCo Environmental Health Services (831) 454-2022 Mike Higgins RWQCB (805) 542-4649 Daniel Shane US EPA (415) 744-2286 Patrick Mathews SCCo Public Works Department (831) 454-2160

Timber Harvesting Donna Bradford SCCo Environmental Health Services (831) 454-7580 Betsy Herbert SLVWD (831) 430-4627 Chris Berry SCWD (831) 420-5483 Rich Sampson CDF (831) 335-6742 Kent Aue DFG (415) 209-9439 Bill Arkfeld formerly with RWQCB (805) 549-3332 Julia Dyer RWQCB (805) 594-6144 Cathleen Carr SCCo (831) 454-3225

Recreation Scott Lang SCWD (831) 335-2586 Chris Spohrer CA Parks and Recreation 359-7420 (cell) Betsy Herbert SLVWD (831) 430-4627

Unauthorized Activity Chris Berry SCWD (831) 420-5483 Scott Lang SCWD (831) 335-2586 Betsy Herbert SLVWD (831) 430-4627 Matt Johnston SCCo Env. Code Compliance (831) 454-3201 Jose DeAnda SCCo Environmental Health Services (831) 454-2022 John Bucchanon CDF (831) 423-0528 Rich Sampson CDF (831) 335-6742 Scott Carson SCCo Environmental Health Services (831) 454-2758 Sergeant Gazza SCCo Sheriff (Felton Stn.) (831) 461-7400 Tom Sayles RWQCB (805) 542-4640

Traffic Accidents and Spills Steve Schneider SCCo Environmental Health Services (831) 454-2022 Jose DeAnda SCCo Environmental Health Services (831) 454-2022 Daniel Shane US EPA (415) 744-2286

206081 Table 3 1 report contact list 3-26-07.xls; Sheet1 Page 2 of 3 Table 3-1. Santa Cruz Watershed Sanitary Survey Contacts

Category Contact Agency Phone Number Geologic Hazards Rob Walker CEMEX (831) 458-5711 Chris Berry SCWD (831) 420-5483 Joe Hanna SCCo Planning Department (454) 454-3175

Fire Scott Lang SCWD, Loch Lomond (831) 335-2586 Chris Spohrer CA Parks and Recreation (831) 359-7420 Tim Hyland CA Parks and Recreation (831) 335-6384 Jim Rust CDF (831) 335-6723 Mike Gagarin CDF (831) 427-2430 Betsy Herbert SLVWD (831) 430-4627 Chief Jeff Maxwell Zayante Fire Dept. (831) 335-5100

Wastewater Rachel Lather SCCo Public Works (831) 420-5160 Scott Hanbe City of Scott's Valley (831)438-0732 Rick Rogers SLVWD (831) 430-4624 Dale Pollock Mt Hermon (831) 335-4466 Mike Higgens RWQCB (805) 542-4649 John Ricker SCCo Environmental Health Services (831) 454-2750

206081 Table 3 1 report contact list 3-26-07.xls; Sheet1 Page 3 of 3 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices

TABLE OF CONTENTS

4. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL PRACTICES...... 1 4.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 4.2 WATER UTILITY MANAGEMENT PRACTICES...... 2 4.2.1 Jurisdiction...... 3 4.2.2 Watershed and reservoir management practices...... 3 4.2.2.1 City of Santa Cruz Water Department...... 3 4.2.3 San Lorenzo Valley Water District ...... 4 4.2.4 Watershed lands acquisition...... 4 4.3 INSPECTION AND SURVEILLANCE OF THE WATERSHEDS ...... 4 4.4 KEY COUNTY WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES ...... 5 4.5 WATERSHED CONTROL AUTHORITY...... 5 4.5.1 The County General Plan and the Local Coastal Program (LCP)...... 6 4.5.2 Wastewater discharge...... 6 4.5.3 Stormwater regulations ...... 7 4.5.4 Mines and quarries...... 7 4.5.5 Animal keeping regulations in Santa Cruz County...... 8 4.5.6 Recreational activities and policies...... 9 4.6 OPEN SPACE POLICIES ...... 9 4.7 EROSION CONTROL/SOIL MANAGEMENT POLICIES...... 10 4.7.1 Roads...... 11 4.8 FIRE MANAGEMENT...... 12 4.9 SANTA CRUZ COUNTY RIPARIAN CORRIDOR AND WETLANDS PROTECTION ORDINANCE ...... 13 4.9.1 Santa Cruz County Sensitive Habitat Protection Ordinance...... 14 4.10 PERTINENT LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION ...... 15 4.10.1 Local Legislation...... 15 4.10.1.1 Santa Cruz County Water Quality Control Ordinance [1974]...... 15 4.10.2 California State Legislation ...... 16 4.10.2.1 California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act [1969] ...... 16 4.10.2.2 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) [1970] ...... 17 4.10.2.3 California Department of Fish and Game ...... 17 4.10.2.4 Other State legislation...... 17 4.10.3 Federal legislation ...... 18 4.10.3.1 Clean Water Act...... 18 4.10.3.2 Section 404 Wetland Filling and/or Dredging Permit Program...... 18

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4-1 Updated Summary of Policies and Practices which Impact Water Quality

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-i Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices

4. WATERSHED MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL PRACTICES

4.1 Introduction

This section summarizes existing policies and control measures of the various entities which manage, control or influence land and resource use in the San Lorenzo and North Coast watersheds. The control measures discussed in this section are those watershed management practices that may impact water quality of the San Lorenzo River and its tributaries, as well as the SCWD’s water supply on the North Coast.

The following sub-sections, which in large part follow the structure of the AWWA Watershed Sanitary Survey Guidance Manual, are included in Section 4:

ƒ Water Utility Management Practices

ƒ Jurisdiction and Population

ƒ Watershed and Reservoir Management Practices

ƒ Watershed Lands Acquisition

ƒ Inspection and Surveillance of the Watersheds

ƒ Key County Watershed Management Activities

ƒ Watershed Control Authority

ƒ The County General Plan and Local Coastal Program (LCP)

ƒ Wastewater Discharge

ƒ Stormwater Regulations

ƒ Mines and Quarries

ƒ Animal Keeping Regulations in Santa Cruz County

ƒ Recreation Activities and Policies

ƒ Open Space Policies

ƒ Erosion Control/Soil Management Policies

ƒ Roads

ƒ Fire Management

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-1 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices

ƒ Santa Cruz County Riparian Corridor and Wetlands Protection Ordinance

ƒ Santa Cruz County Sensitive Habitat Protection Ordinance

ƒ Pertinent State and Federal Legislation

ƒ California State Legislation

ƒ Federal Legislation

Some of these sub-sections have changed since completion of the 1996 sanitary survey and the 2001 update (Watershed and Reservoir Management Practices, Watershed Lands Acquisition, Key County Watershed Management Activities, and Animal Keeping Regulations). The details of the remaining sub-sections have not changed since those reports and are thus only summarized in the present sanitary survey. Table 4-1 lists the general policies and practices that impact water quality in the project study area and summarizes their effectiveness. Generally, there appears to be a comprehensive group of regulations, policies, and practices in place that can be used to effectively manage watershed activities. Plate 1 shows the primary watershed and subwatershed boundaries, as well as the locations of the drinking water utilities. The County GIS system has numerous layers which can be used to identify the locations of specific uses within the approximate boundaries shown in Plate 1 (e.g., open spaces, water district boundaries).

4.2 Water Utility Management Practices

The SCWD, the SLVWD, and the California Department of State Parks are the largest watershed property managers in the project area; however, several of the smaller water purveyors own and/or manage land adjacent to their wells, springs and surface water intakes. Watershed management practices vary for each utility agency. The SCWD, for example, manages its lands to maintain optimal water quality and to limit recreation at the Loch Lomond Reservoir. SLVWD also manages its watershed lands, through administration of their Watershed Protection Plan, to maintain optimal water quality, limit access, and minimize potential land disturbances.

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-2 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices

4.2.1 Jurisdiction

The jurisdictional area of this sanitary survey is within Santa Cruz County. Within the sanitary survey watersheds, the City of Santa Cruz serves the Pasatiempo and Sycamore Grove areas. The other water utilities participating in the Sanitary Survey are located in the San Lorenzo River watershed and are in unincorporated portions of Santa Cruz County, except for a portion of the middle Bean Creek watershed within the City of Scotts Valley. Most of the City of Scotts Valley drains to the San Lorenzo River via Carbonera Creek and Branciforte Creek, which flow into the San Lorenzo River below the SCWD Tait Street Diversion. This portion of Scotts Valley shares most watershed management issues with the San Lorenzo Valley but is not part of the 2006 watershed sanitary survey.

4.2.2 Watershed and reservoir management practices 4.2.2.1 City of Santa Cruz Water Department

The SCWD owns watershed land in the Newell Creek (2,880 acres), Zayante Creek (880 acres), and Laguna Creek (240 acres) watersheds. The SCWD has developed a comprehensive water resources management program, in part, to manage City-owned lands for water-quality protection. The primary objective of the water resources management program is to focus on environmental compliance on the part of the City with applicable State and Federal regulations. In addition to the primary charge of the program, some effort is spent reviewing and commenting on plans which if implemented may impact City water resources, and assisting the Santa Cruz County Resource Conservation District with public outreach and education. The SCWD now employs four staff (two full-time and two part-time) to implement this program. The SCWD also conducted a Watershed Lands Assessment of natural resources in order to make more informed decisions regarding management of watershed lands for water quality and quantity protection and protection of special status species and their habitats.

The Loch Lomond Recreation Area (LLRA) is managed for water quality as well as recreational benefits. One of the most significant reservoir management changes since the 2001 sanitary survey update is management of blue-green algae (cyanobacteria) blooms at Loch Lomond through the use of PAK 27TM – a non-copper-based algaecide. PAK 27TM is characterized as an environmentally safe algaecide/algaestat which produces oxygen and hydrogen peroxide by-products, neither of which are reported to

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-3 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices be harmful to aquatic species, such as fish, or other forms of algae, such as green algae or diatoms. However, it is also important to consider that a recent ruling by the State Water Resources Control Board grants the City of Santa Cruz an exception for the use of copper-based algaecides, if the need arises (General Permit No. CAG990005). In addition to blue-green algae management, wastewater is trucked out of the recreation area, human body contact recreation is not allowed at the reservoir, and no cattle or horses are permitted in the watershed.

4.2.3 San Lorenzo Valley Water District

The SLVWD service boundaries encompass 37,120 acres in the San Lorenzo Valley watershed, including a small portion of the Pescadero drainage which is northwest of the San Lorenzo River watershed. Watershed lands owned by the SLVWD include approximately 1,000 acres in one continuous piece on Ben Lomond Mountain, around the tributaries of the San Lorenzo River that supply the SLVWD’s surface water (Clear Creek, Sweetwater Creek, Peavine Creek, Foreman Creek, and Silver Creek), and in the Malosky Creek and Harmon Creek drainages. The SLVWD also owns approximately 126 acres in the recharge area of its Olympia wellfield. Marked trails on these watershed areas are used by horse riders. Informal surveillance of the watershed lands is conducted periodically by SLVWD staff. Generally, staff will look for potential problems while in the field. The primary concerns continue to focus on trespassers and off-road vehicles. Public access is limited.

Timber harvesting continues to not be permitted on SLVWD watershed lands. No pesticide/herbicide use is permitted on SLVWD lands.

4.2.4 Watershed lands acquisition

The SLVWD purchased the 188-acre Malosky Creek property from Sempervirens Fund in 2006. This property had been on the District’s list of most wanted watershed acquisitions for years. The District’s 5-mile long pipeline crosses the property. As part of the transaction, the SLVWD agreed to retire the timber rights on the property. The SLVWD has had a no-commercial logging policy on its watershed lands since the 1980s.

4.3 Inspection and Surveillance of the Watersheds

Inspection and surveillance of watershed lands in the project area are performed by numerous agencies, depending on ownership and type of use. For example, State Parks

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-4 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices regulations are enforced by Parks staff. County Parks, like Quail Hollow County Park (about 300 acres), are managed by County Parks personnel. Surveillance of the purveyor-owned watershed lands is conducted by the water purveyors themselves. In addition, the City patrols the Pogonip Preserve open space area upstream of the Tait Street diversion. The remainder of the project area is under the jurisdiction of Santa Cruz County.

The County of Santa Cruz's Planning Department, Health Services Agency, and Department of Public Works develop and enforce water-quality related county ordinances and provide review and permitting of development plans, timber harvest plans, erosion control plans, quarry plans, and maintenance of county roads. The Santa Cruz County Fire Department and the Office of Emergency Services participate in the development of fire-related development standards and post-fire restorations efforts, in addition to the review and updating of the countywide Disaster Contingency Plan and Critical Fire Hazard Maps.

4.4 Key County Watershed Management Activities

As previously mentioned, Santa Cruz County developed a comprehensive management plan for the San Lorenzo River watershed in 1979. The management plan was recently updated in 2001 through a collaborative process with the Regional Board, a citizen and landowner group, and other agencies. The ongoing efforts by the County and the completed update to the watershed management plan underscore the continued efforts of the County to implement practices, programs and ordinances which aim to improve water quality in the San Lorenzo River watershed. Pertinent efforts and data from those efforts will be used for the purposes of this report to summarize water quality and watershed management activities in the San Lorenzo River watershed.

4.5 Watershed Control Authority

Policies and control measures adopted by the governmental agencies are described in this subsection. All the watersheds in this area are located in Santa Cruz County, and are therefore subject to the policies adopted by the County General Plan. Key goals and policies outlined in the General Plan are described below.

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-5 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices

4.5.1 The County General Plan and the Local Coastal Program (LCP)

The 1994 Santa Cruz County General Plan and the Local Coastal Program (LCP) is a combined planning document that serves two primary purposes. First, it establishes a regulatory framework against which all proposed development is measured. Second, it serves as a vision statement for the desired future of the county. The General Plan was prepared to meet the requirements of both the State Planning Laws and the Coastal Act.

The General Plan sets up numerous goals, objectives, policies, and programs related to the protection of water resources and sensitive habitats. The County adopted an ecosystem approach while drafting ordinances pertinent to water quality concerns. In other words, there is a clear understanding that by preserving and enhancing the natural systems of the county, a secure and safe drinking water supply will most likely be obtained. General Plan elements that contain goals most pertinent to the protection of water resources are as follows: Chapter 5 - Conservation and Open Space, Chapter 6 - Public Safety and Noise, and Chapter 7 - Parks Recreation and Public Facilities. The General Plan Conservation and Open Space, Public Safety and Noise, and Parks and Recreation and Public Facilities elements have not been updated since 1994.

4.5.2 Wastewater discharge

Wastewater discharge requirements for point source discharges from wastewater treatment plants or from industrial facility plants to receiving streams are established through National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits administered by the Regional Board under the federal Clean Water Act. These NPDES permits control the discharge by establishing numerical effluent limitations for specific constituents and parameters which the treatment plant or industrial facility must meet. The constituents for which effluent limitations are established are specific to the type of discharge. Suspended solids and coliform bacteria may be regulated, depending on the type of plant or facility. Each NPDES permittee collects data which it reports to the Regional Board on a regular basis. This self-monitoring data demonstrates compliance status with the specific effluent limitations.

Wastewater discharges to septic systems are regulated by the County within guidelines established by the Regional Board. Although no changes have been made to the County Sewage Disposal Ordinance, policies have been adopted to provide for tighter oversight and maintenance of alternative technology systems. In addition, a State-revolving fund

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-6 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices has been established to promote the use of such systems through a low-interest loan program.

4.5.3 Stormwater regulations

Municipalities with populations greater than 100,000 and certain classes of industries (including construction sites which involve a land disturbance of more than 5 acres) are regulated under the NPDES Phase I permit program administered by the Regional Board. Municipal permits are specific and individual to the municipality in question, but all contain provisions for management of specific activities (e.g., construction, new development planning, industries, illicit discharges, public agency activities such as street sweeping and public education) and for monitoring. Certain classes of industries are required to file a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with the provisions of the State General Industrial Stormwater NPDES Phase I Permit. The industry makes this notification to the SWRCB and, thereafter, is expected to comply with the general permit provisions which focus on pollution prevention and good housekeeping measures. Construction sites with a land disturbance greater than 5 acres must file a NOI with the SWRCB to comply with provisions of the state General Construction Activities Stormwater NPDES Phase I Permit. This permit focuses on sediment control and waste management. The SWRCB maintains a database of industries and construction sites which have filed NOIs.

The County of Santa Cruz and the City of Santa Cruz have each completed and submitted a complete Phase II NPDES application to the Regional Board; however, the Regional Board has yet to approve the submitted Storm Water Management Plans. Despite this, the County and City both require construction phase and post-construction phase erosion control plans for construction projects encompassing an area of less than 5 acres and for which grading is part of the construction plan. The plans typically must include best management practices (BMPs) which protect against illegal discharge of pollutants to the creeks and streams in the project area. The Phase II regulations provide support for existing County and City ordinances which establish the criteria for protection of water quality and natural resources.

4.5.4 Mines and quarries

Surface discharges from both active and inactive mines to receiving streams are regulated by the Regional Board under the Waste Discharge Requirement permit

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-7 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices program. Permit conditions for discharges from active mines usually allow only inert or non-hazardous waste releases. Mines typically meet these requirements by implementing various best management practices.

Regulation of mine and quarry operations in the watershed study area is covered under the County Mining ordinance. Mineral Resource Areas are designated by the State Geologist and State Mining and Geology Board. The County classifies these areas as within the County Mineral Zone Extraction District (M-3) and requires environmentally sound quarry operations and reclamation practices in accordance with the state Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA), which emphasizes the primacy of post- reclamation uses and the need to plan and limit mining to be compatible with such uses. Development on M-3 lands is restricted to mining and other compatible uses. Environmental impact assessments for mining operations are required. Mining operations adjacent to riparian corridors must be conducted in accordance with the Riparian Corridor and Wetlands Protection ordinance. Quarry operations are overseen by the County Planning Department Quarry Coordinator. There have been no changes made to the County Mining Ordinance since completion of the 1996 sanitary survey or the 2001 update.

4.5.5 Animal keeping regulations in Santa Cruz County

The County of Santa Cruz does not currently have a specific ordinance regulating domestic and confined animals in residential and rural areas. General animal keeping and breeding regulations, however, are outlined in the County Code under Chapter 13.10, Part VI, Article IV (animal regulations). The Article provides regulations for animal enclosures (stables and paddocks), care of animals (animal hospitals and kennels), animal keeping (horses, cows, sheep, etc.) different types of animal raising (family raising, poultry, bird, turkeys, etc.) and biomedical animal operations.

At the time of the 2001 sanitary survey update, the County of Santa Cruz made efforts to outline new recommendations for the management of horses and farm animals with the intent to minimize nitrogen, sediment and contaminant concentrations in effluent discharged from stable and paddock areas. These recommendations were formally outlined in the 2001 San Lorenzo River Management Plan update. After meeting with stakeholders, however, it was agreed that the County would not formally enact these recommendations through development of a County ordinance, but would instead

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-8 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices pursue an approach of education, technical assistance and voluntary compliance with horse and animal keepers. In implementing the proactive approach, the Santa Cruz County Resource Conservation District received a Clean Water Act Section 319(h) grant in 2001 to work with the Santa Cruz County Horsemen’s Association to improve stable and paddock management techniques for the betterment of creek, stream and ground- water water quality. One hope of the voluntary approach is that landowners will maintain manure piles and paddock areas at least 50 to 100 feet away from streams or smaller drainages, and minimize surface flow connectivity from manure piles and paddock areas to streams or smaller drainages. In the future, it may be advisable to develop site-specific animal keeping regulations to maximize surface water quality benefit.

4.5.6 Recreational activities and policies

Agencies which administer the recreational and open space areas in the watershed study area include the County Parks Department, the Boulder Creek Recreation and Park Department, the State Department of Parks and Recreation, and the SCWD. Management policies in the SCWD’s Loch Lomond Recreation Area were previously described. Overall, recreational policies and open space policies in the watershed are described in the County’s General Plan. Since the General Plan has not been updated since 1994, recreational policies and open space policies have not changed since completion of the 1996 sanitary survey and the 2001 update.

The County Health Services Agency continues to routinely monitor creek and river swimming areas in the San Lorenzo Valley for fecal coliform bacteria. This monitoring is conducted to obtain information on when to issue advisories avoiding swimming areas, and is part of larger County-wide program. The State parks in the watershed study area are essentially open spaces. The County General Plan promotes cooperation with state activities and specifically encourages expansion of state ownership at the Fall Creek and Henry Cowell park units.

4.6 Open Space Policies

The Santa Cruz County General Plan goals for open space protection are as follows:

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-9 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices

"To retain the scenic wooded, open space and rural character of Santa Cruz County; to provide a natural buffer between communities; to prevent development in naturally hazardous areas; and to protect wildlife habitat and other resources."

Within the project watersheds, the majority of the population is concentrated along Highway 9 on the floor of the San Lorenzo Valley. Steep slopes and rugged terrain have long been a significant constraint to commercial and residential development in all areas of Santa Cruz County. As a result, the area is rural in general character, heavily forested, and visually dominated by open and undeveloped space.

Henry Cowell Redwoods State Park, the Fall Creek unit of Henry Cowell, Castle Rock State Park, and Big Basin Redwood State Park are all managed as public open space. The water purveyors' watershed lands are managed for water resource protection, and to a limited extent, for timber and recreation. Several land trusts, including the Santa Cruz County Land Trust, the Sempervirens Fund, and the Cowell Foundation own and/or manage open spaces in the project area. A portion of the University of California Santa Cruz - Upper Campus and the Pogonip Preserve are adjacent to Henry Cowell Redwoods State Park in the San Lorenzo Valley. Portions of the UCSC campus draining to Gold Gulch or the San Lorenzo River above Tait Street are presently managed as open space. Several summer camps, conference centers, and retreats operate small water systems and own watershed lands. Private owners hold the remainder of lands in the project area.

4.7 Erosion Control/Soil Management Policies

The County has an Erosion Control Ordinance with the purpose of eliminating and preventing conditions of accelerated erosion that may lead to degradation of water quality, loss of fish habitat, damage to property, loss of topsoil and vegetative cover, disruption of water supply, and increased danger from flooding. The policies in the ordinance that are intended to protect water supply are as follows:

ƒ Streams or drainage courses shall not be obstructed or disturbed except for approved road crossings, unless disturbance of a drainage course will improve overall site design and be consistent with the purpose of the ordinance.

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-10 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices

ƒ Erosion control measures specified in, or pursuant to, this ordinance, shall be in place and maintained at all times between October 15 and April 15.

ƒ Runoff from activities subject to a building permit, land division permit, or development permit shall be properly controlled to prevent erosion.

ƒ Land clearing shall be kept to a minimum and vegetation removal shall be limited to that amount necessary for building, access, and construction.

When no land development permit has been issued, the following types of land clearing require an erosion control plan:

ƒ Any amount of clearing in a sensitive habitat.

ƒ One-quarter acre or more of clearing in the Coastal Zone if also in a least disturbed watershed, a water supply watershed, or an area of high erosion hazard.

ƒ One acre or more of clearing in all areas not included in the above items.

When a land development permit has been issued, land clearing may be done in accordance with the approved development plan; however, approval of land clearing requires that “all disturbed surfaces shall be prepared and maintained to control erosion and to establish native or naturalized vegetative growth compatible with the area.”

Despite the fact that the Erosion Control Ordinance has not changed since the 2001 sanitary survey update, new stormwater discharge regulations under Phase II of the NPDES permitting system administered by the Regional Board are now more or less followed by both the City and the County through administration of various permits, including most notably construction permits. Both entities require erosion control plans covering the construction and post-construction phases of projects as small as less than one acre in size. The erosion control plans are developed to protect against illegal discharge of sediment and other contaminants to creeks, streams and other water bodies.

4.7.1 Roads

As mentioned in Section 3, Timber Harvest Plans and logging activities are required to construct and maintain roads to minimize erosion. A significant portion of the sediment

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-11 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices and debris that washes into streams, however, originates from other public and private roadways (c.f., Swanson, 2001).

Caltrans and the County Department of Public Works are responsible for roadway maintenance on specific corridors. Both agencies have policies to truck roadway debris to designated dump sites. For example, they should not “broad-cast” or “side-cast” debris to the side of any road, especially roads near streams. Water purveyors and County Planning Department staff both expressed concerns that these policies are not consistently followed, which leads to increased sediment loading to streams.

Also, some county roads are owned jointly and shared among residents in rural areas. The County has established numerous roadway associations to tax residents and fund maintenance, culvert design and construction for these roads. This keeps the County in control of the maintenance activities and proper techniques are typically followed to mitigate erosion. In addition, the Santa Cruz County Resource Conservation District has undertaken a private roads rehabilitation program aimed at identifying those private road segments (after being approached by private landowners or roads associations) which contribute sediment to creeks and streams and further identifying repair schemes for the sediment contributing road segments. As a partner in this effort, the Coastal Watershed Council has developed a Rural Roads Sediment Inventory Manual which Council and Conservation District staff can use while conducting roads inventory work. The next phase of this project will include monitoring post-construction sediment production from those road segments previously identified as sediment contributors. The monitoring program will permit critical review of the effectiveness of road sediment reduction methodologies.

4.8 Fire Management

The General Plan fire management objective is “to protect the public from the hazards of fire through citizen awareness, mitigating the risks of fire, responsible fire protection planning, and built-in systems for fire protection and suppression.”

The San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast watersheds are within the jurisdiction of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF), locally headquartered on Highway 9 in Felton. CDF is equipped to suppress wildland fires throughout the project area. Local fire districts take primary responsibility for fighting domestic and

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-12 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices commercial fires in their specific areas of jurisdiction. At the county level, the Santa Cruz County Fire Marshall is responsible for the coordination between neighboring fire districts, particularly during first alarm response. The Santa Cruz County Office of Emergency Services provides communication and warning services to area residents and fire districts.

Prescribed burning by the California Department of Parks and Recreation at the perimeters of Henry Cowell Redwoods State Park and Big Basin State Park is conducted to minimize the potential spread of a major conflagration either into or out of the parks. Prescribed burns are also used to promote fire-tolerant native vegetation threatened by invasive non-natives.

CFD staff apply chemical fire retardants from fixed-wing aircraft, and chemical fire suppressants from helicopters, both of which are based at the CDF-Hollister Air Attack station. Helicopters may also use buckets to drop water collected from Loch Lomond Reservoir or smaller impoundments for fire control. In larger fires, aircraft from other CDF bases may assist with fire control efforts. Where access is available and/or the size of the fire is limited, the fire may be fought using engines loaded with water or chemical fire suppressants mobilized out of the Felton office and/ or County fire stations.

4.9 Santa Cruz County Riparian Corridor and Wetlands Protection Ordinance

The purpose of this ordinance is to eliminate or minimize encroachment into the riparian corridors of Santa Cruz County to preserve, protect, and restore riparian corridors. No development activities are allowed within the riparian corridor other than those allowed through the following exemptions and exceptions:

The continuance of any pre-existing nonagricultural use, provided such use has not lapsed for a period of one year or more. This includes changes of uses which do not significantly increase the degree of encroachment into or impact on the riparian corridor as determined by the Planning Director.

ƒ The continuance of any pre-existing agricultural use, provided such use has been exercised within the last five years.

ƒ All activities done pursuant to a County Timber Harvest Permit.

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-13 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices

ƒ Control or eradication of a pest as defined in Section 5006, Food and Agriculture Code, as required or authorized by the County Agricultural Commissioner.

ƒ Drainage, erosion control, or habitat restoration measure required as a condition of County approval of a permitted project.

The ordinance has not changed since completion of the 1996 sanitary survey or the 2001 update.

4.9.1 Santa Cruz County Sensitive Habitat Protection Ordinance

The purpose of the Sensitive Habitat Protection Ordinance is to minimize the disturbance of biotic communities which are rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem. Lakes, wetlands, estuaries, lagoons, streams, rivers, and riparian corridors are among the habitats considered sensitive. Some of the sensitive-habitat policies have changed since completion of the 2001 sanitary survey update. These changes include:

ƒ A more comprehensive list of permitted or discretionary land uses within different types of sensitive habitats, for example kelp beds and cliff nesting areas;

ƒ A comprehensive list of permitted or discretionary land uses adjacent to the essential habitats of rare and endangered species; and

ƒ A comprehensive list of permitted or discretionary land uses for lands of locally unique species.

In addition to these changes, sensitive habitat policies of interest include:

ƒ No toxic chemical substance shall be used in such a way as to have deleterious effects on the habitat unless an emergency has been declared, or such use has been deemed necessary by the California Department of Fish and Game to eliminate or reduce a threat to the habitat itself, or a substantial risk to public health will exist if the toxic chemical substance is not used.

ƒ The Agricultural Commissioner, when reviewing an application to use a restricted material, shall consider the potential effects of the material on a sensitive habitat, and mitigation measures shall be required as necessary to protect the habitat. No approval shall be issued if adverse impacts cannot be mitigated.

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-14 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices

ƒ A biotic assessment shall be required for all development activities and applications in areas of biotic concern.

ƒ No development activity shall commence until approved, unless such activity has been reviewed concurrently with the review of a development or land division permit.

Any development within any sensitive habitat area shall be subject to the following conditions:

ƒ All development shall mitigate significant environmental impacts.

ƒ Dedication of an open space, conservation easement, or equivalent measure shall be required as necessary to protect the portion of a sensitive habitat which is undisturbed by the proposed activity or to protect a sensitive habitat on an adjacent parcel.

ƒ Restoration of any area which is a degraded sensitive habitat or has caused or is causing the degradation of a sensitive habitat shall be required, provided that any restoration required shall be commensurate with the scale of the proposed development.

No new development shall be allowed adjacent to marshes, streams, and bodies of water if such development would cause adverse impacts on water quality which cannot be mitigated or will not be fully mitigated by the project proponent. Development that has received a riparian exception according to the provision of the Riparian Corridor and Wetlands Protection Ordinance may be exempted from the provisions of this ordinance if the Planning Director has determined that the activity has received a review that is equivalent to the review required by the Sensitive Habitat Protection Ordinance.

4.10 Pertinent Local, State and Federal Legislation 4.10.1 Local Legislation 4.10.1.1 Santa Cruz County Water Quality Control Ordinance [1974]

Santa Cruz County developed a water quality ordinance in 1974 to manage the turbidity level of natural waters in relation to projects which may impact these turbidity levels. Numerical criteria were established in relation to the impact on natural water turbidity levels from the implementation of any project. If the criteria are exceeded due to activity of any permitted project, then the project is deemed to be in violation of the permit. The County criteria are valid unless more stringent permit criteria are established by the California Department of Fish and Game or the Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-15 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices

4.10.2 California State Legislation 4.10.2.1 California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act [1969]

The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act is the state law governing nonpoint-source water quality regulation. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has responsibility for the State's water quality and water rights programs. State policies set forth by the SWRCB are administered by nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards. The Porter-Cologne Act refers to the Regional Boards as "principal state agencies with the primary responsibility for the coordination and control of water quality" (Section 13001). The Regional Boards are also directed to adopt water quality control plans (Basin Plans) for all regions within the State. Santa Cruz County is within the Central Coast Region, which includes San Luis Obispo, Monterey, Santa Barbara and San Benito Counties, along with small portions of Santa Clara, San Mateo, Kern and Ventura Counties.

Water quality standards for individual projects are established by the Regional Board as part of the NPDES Phase I and Phase II permitting procedure under the Federal Clean Water Act. The NPDES program applies to all point-, and nonpoint-source discharges to all surface waters including wetlands. Municipalities must obtain an individual or regional NPDES stormwater permit for the entire stormwater drainage system. This applies to both municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4’s) which service populations in excess of 100,000 and industrial/construction sites with coverage greater than 5 acres (Phase I) as well as smaller MS4’s which service populations less than 100,000 and industrial/construction sites which cover an area of 1 to 5 acres.

Land management activities (such as timber harvests and agriculture) that have the potential to affect water quality and are not covered under the NPDES program are regulated by the Regional Boards under the authority of the Porter-Cologne Act. In 1999, the California legislature passed Bill 390, which clarified the role of the Regional Boards in actively regulating these activities. Specifically, this Bill required a re- evaluation of all waivers of waste discharge requirements (WDRs). In response, the Central Coast Regional Board determined that the long-standing categorical waiver for timber harvest activities should not be renewed. Instead, in 2005, the Regional Board issued a general conditional waiver of WDRs for timber harvest activities that are not subject to individual conditional waivers or WDRs. The general conditional waiver boosts the role of the Regional Board in review of THPs during the CDF approval

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-16 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices process and requires notification by timber harvesters once the THP has been approved. In addition, the waiver’s Monitoring and Reporting Program results in post-harvest inspections by Regional Board staff.

4.10.2.2 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) [1970]

CEQA was modeled after the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and establishes the state's basic framework for the environmental review of new development projects. CEQA provides the effected agencies and the public with a role in the review of proposed development and sets forth standards of significance when evaluating the potential effects of projects. CEQA requires that potential adverse impacts be identified and mitigated.

4.10.2.3 California Department of Fish and Game

The California Department of Fish and Game is responsible for the regulation of impacts to wetlands, rivers, and lakes through the mandate of Sections 1601-1603 of State Fish and Game Code. The department is required to review projects with the potential to divert or obstruct natural flows of waters in streambeds and wetlands. Alteration of wetlands, river, streams and lakes must be done with the permission of the Department of Fish and Game, which places conditions of approval on the proposed action to mitigate any adverse effects to the habitat to be altered.

The Department of Fish and Game also regulates the hunting and trapping of wild and feral pigs on public and private lands. It has been reported that feral pigs have become established near one of SLVWD’s intake structures. Similar conditions in lands owned by the City of San Francisco’s Water Department (SFWD) and the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) led to the development of a wild pig-removal program. The Department of Fish and Game developed a Memorandum of Understanding to control the pig population. The memorandum includes requirements for disposal of pig carcasses, reporting program results, and maintenance of specific records.

4.10.2.4 Other State legislation

Several other key state acts affect the management of pollutants and the potential impacts to water quality that may result from their use:

ƒ Pesticide Contamination Act [1967]

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-17 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices

ƒ Forest Practice Act [1973]

ƒ Subdivision Map Act [1974]

ƒ Hazardous Waste Control Act [1982]

ƒ Underground Storage and Hazardous Waste Substances Act [1983]

ƒ Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act [1986]

ƒ Integrated Waste Management Act [1989]

4.10.3 Federal legislation

Federal provisions pertinent to the sanitary survey are described below.

4.10.3.1 Clean Water Act

The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, also known as the Clean Water Act (CWA), was enacted to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's water." The CWA established the NPDES permit program described above under California regulations. The CWA also includes Section 303(d), which specifically requires states to identify those water bodies not meeting established water quality goals relative to a pollutant or a suite of pollutants. Once a water body is found to not meet applicable water quality goals, it must be added to the 303(d) list as an impaired water body and a TMDL must be developed for the specified pollutants. The San Lorenzo River is 303(d) listed for pathogens (1994), sediment (2003), and nitrate nitrogen (2003). The pathogen listing is presently in the Phase 6 regulatory action step and has been recommended for listing as a low priority on the pathogen list. Pathogen data will be continued to be collected until at least 2007 and corrective actions may be taken if discrete sources of pathogens are identified. The sediment and the nitrate TMDLs are in the implementation phase. In association with 303(d) listing, the County and the SCWD have implemented monitoring programs to collect data on turbidity, nitrate, and pathogen levels in the San Lorenzo River at different monitoring locations. These monitoring activities are playing an integral role in the watershed efforts to improve water quality in the San Lorenzo system.

4.10.3.2 Section 404 Wetland Filling and/or Dredging Permit Program

Section 404 of the CWA regulates the discharge of dredged and fill material into wetlands and water of the United States, and establishes a permit program to ensure

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-18 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 4 Sanitary Survey Watersheds Management and Control Practices that such discharge complies with environmental requirements. The 404 permit process is administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The activities regulated by Section 404 include channel construction and maintenance, filling wetlands to create development sites, transportation improvements, and water resource projects. Some activities that may adversely impact wetlands and rivers, such as drainage or ground-water pumping, are often conducted without discharging dredged or fill material and are not regulated under Section 404. The exemptions to Section 404 that are pertinent to the sanitary survey study area include: normal farming, ranching and silvicultural practices; maintenance and emergency repair of levees and bridges; construction or maintenance of farm or stock ponds; construction of temporary sedimentation basins; and construction or maintenance of farm and forest roads, if best management practices are followed.

Section 4 03-20-07.doc 4-19 Table 4‐1 Updated Summary of Policies and Practices which Impact Water Quality Agency/Utility Primary Policies or Effectiveness of Policies and Watershed Controls which Practices Objective Impact Water Quality

Water Utilities – • Protect drinking water • Control or disallow • Watershed Resources Management notably City of supply. public access to Program is resulting in the collection of Santa Cruz Water • Protect water quality watershed lands. valuable data which is used to plan for Department of drinking water • Manage secure intake more effective lands management. sources and manage structures. • Continued success in working with other to minimize quality • Implementation and agencies/groups on projects which change. growth of the enhance water quality protection • Manage to avoid Watershed Protection measures. microbiological and Program. • Increased patrolling of source facilities is chemical • Advocacy and helping to minimize impacts associated contamination. environmental with trespassing and illicit land use. • Manage drinking review of proposed water sourcesheds for projects in watershed environmental lands. quality. Santa Cruz County • General Plan • County General Plan. • Grading/erosion control ordinance can be (e.g., Parks, Health established a • Surveillance of parks. too cumbersome to small homeowners or Services Agency, regulatory approach • Control illegal or mis‐ small projects. Planning to plan future implemented • Exceptions to ordinances often granted. Department) development. grading, • San Lorenzo Watershed management • Regulate septic development and plan is well thought out and presents systems. dumping. tangible recommendations for betterment • Protect riparian and • Reduce nitrates, of water quality. wetland systems. pathogens and • Turbidity, nitrate and pathogen • Regulate erosion sediment in streams. monitoring in support of the 303(d) control practices. • San Lorenzo River impairment listing is providing needed • Regulate small water Watershed data to track trends and responses to systems. management plan. implemented projects. • Provides for open • County Forest • Weakness still lies in short staffing. space access. Practice Rules. • Wastewater/Nitrate management plan. California Dept. of • Suppress wildland • Prescribed burning to • No wildfires have occurred in the area Forestry (CDF) fires (fire protection minimize impact of for many decades. division). larger fires. • Excessive fuel levels and substantial • Control logging • Require Timber urban/rural interface area could result in (resource Harvest Plans for severe wildfire. management logging of more than • Harvest Plans are comprehensive, division). 3 acres. though follow through is occasionally • Monitor and enforce not sufficient. forest practice rules. • Some harvests cause roadway erosion. • Coordinate fire • Threatened and impaired harvest rules fighting efforts. should provide water quality protection.

206081 Table 4.1.doc ; Balance Hydrologics, 2006 Table 4.1 Updated Summary of Policies and Practices which Impact Water Quality Agency/Utility Primary Policies or Effectiveness of Policies and Watershed Controls which Practices Objective Impact Water Quality

• Adopt area‐wide • Enforcement power • Regional Board is coordinating with California State water quality control to issue permits with County’s efforts to reduce nitrates. Water Resources plans. specific water quality Approved nitrate TMDL and Sediment Control Board and • Control/coordinate requirements. TMDL in 2000 and 2003, respectively. the Regional Water water quality issues. • Enforcement power • Pathogen TMDL is in the final phase of Quality Control • Control quality and of State Water Code. Regional Board administration and is Board ‐ Central quantity of discharges • Issue NPDES permits pending corrective action is sources are Coast Region from wastewater to specific entities for identified. (SWRCB and treatment facilities waters‐of‐the‐state • Implementing programs to emphasize RWQCB) and construction discharges. watershed protection from both point activities. • Establish water and non‐point discharges. quality objectives. • Regional Board is now more active in the • Pathogen, Nitrate and review of Timber Harvest Plans from a Sediment TMDL for water quality perspective. San Lorenzo River. • Provide some funding for septic tank system improvements. • Administering Phase II NPDES regulations. California • Protect fish and • Enforcement power • DFG has specific regulations to control Department of Fish wildlife. of state code. water quality. and Game (DFG) • Permit diversions • Limit diversions from • DFG is not well organized or setup to from waterways. waterways. enforce applicable water quality • 1600 permits now regulations because game wardens are require CEQA police rather than scientists. review. • Staff turnover may limit effectiveness. • Salmonid Restoration Grants Program is viable mechanism for drinking water source protection.

206081 Table 4.1.doc ; Balance Hydrologics, 2006

Table 4.1 Updated Summary of Policies and Practices which Impact Water Quality Agency/Utility Primary Policies or Effectiveness of Policies and Watershed Controls which Practices Objective Impact Water Quality

• Construct and • Minimize herbicide • Storage, sidecast, and transfer of Cal‐Trans and maintain primary and use. roadway debris can lead to increased County Public secondary roadways. • Avoid dumping sediment in streams. Works • Respond to accidents debris into streams • Endangered Species Act requirements and landslides. from roads projects. may improve road practices. • Design of drainage • Quick response to • Implementing projects which improve in‐ systems and in‐stream chemical spills. stream salmonid habitat and riparian habitat improvements habitat in conjunction with roads projects. • Protection‐restoration • Implement and • City of Santa Cruz is presently engaged National Marine of special status enforce the in ESA related negotiations as a part of Fisheries Services species (Coho Salmon Endangered Species preparing the City’s Habitat (NMFS) and Steelhead Trout) Act (ESA). Conservation Plan. in the San Lorenzo • Sediment reduction will improve and North Coast turbidity. watersheds. • Potential source loss from the north coast surface sources through ESA compliance may result in a degradation of ambient City water supply quality. • Protection‐restoration • Implement and • City of Santa Cruz is presently engaged United States Fish of special status enforce the in ESA related negotiations as a part of and Wildlife Service species (Red‐legged Endangered Species preparing the City’s Habitat (USFWS) Frog, etc.) in the San Act. Conservation Plan. Lorenzo and North • Sediment reduction will improve Coast watersheds. turbidity. • Potential source loss from the north coast surface sources through ESA compliance may result in a degradation of ambient City water supply quality.

206081 Table 4.1.doc ; Balance Hydrologics, 2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

TABLE OF CONTENTS

5. WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS AND EVALUATION ...... 1 5.1 WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS ...... 1 5.2 CURRENT SURFACE WATER TREATMENT REGULATIONS ...... 2 5.2.1 Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) and Disinfectants/Disinfectant Byproducts Rule...... 2 5.3 WATER QUALITY CONSTITUENTS OF CONCERN...... 3 5.3.1 Cryptosporidium and Giardia ...... 3 5.3.2 Turbidity ...... 3 5.3.3 Disinfection and disinfection byproducts ...... 4 5.3.4 Total Organic Carbon (TOC)...... 4 5.3.5 Perchlorate...... 5 5.4 UPCOMING REGULATIONS...... 5 5.4.1 Upcoming Surface Water Treatment Regulations ...... 5 5.4.2 Upcoming Groundwater Regulations...... 5 5.4.2.1 Radionuclides Rule ...... 5 5.4.2.2 Arsenic Rule...... 6 5.4.2.3 Groundwater Rule...... 6 5.5 WATER QUALITY EVALUATION...... 7 5.5.1 Coliform bacteria ...... 7 5.5.2 County of Santa Cruz...... 9 5.5.3 Santa Cruz Water Department ...... 10 5.6 TURBIDITY...... 12 5.6.1 County of Santa Cruz...... 13 5.6.2 Santa Cruz Water Department ...... 14 5.6.3 Nitrate...... 15 5.6.4 County of Santa Cruz...... 15 5.6.5 Santa Cruz Water Department ...... 16 5.7 ODORS...... 17 5.8 ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS ...... 18 5.9 MISCELLANEOUS WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS ...... 18

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-i Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

LIST OF TABLES

Table 5-1 Regulatory Schedule

Table 5-2 Summary of Nitrate Data Evaluated

Table 5-3 Total Hardness Summary of Available Data (mg/L as CaCO3)

Table 5-4 Calcium Summary of Available Data (mg/L)

Table 5-5 Magnesium Summary of Available Data (mg/L)

Table 5-6 Sodium Summary of Available Data (mg/L)

Table 5-7 Potassium Summary of Available Data (mg/L)

Table 5-8 Alkalinity Summary of Available Data (mg/L as CaCO3)

Table 5-9 Sulfate Summary of Available Data (mg/L)

Table 5-10 Chloride Summary of Available Data (mg/L)

Table 5-11 Fluoride Summary of Available Data (mg/L)

Table 5-12 Water pH Summary of Available Data (units)

Table 5-13 Total Dissolved Solids Summary of Available Data (mg/L)

Table 5-14 Conductivity Summary of Available Data ( mho/cm)

Table 5-15 Apparent Color Summary of Available Data (units)

Table 5-16 MBAS Summary of Available Data (mg/L)

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 5-1 Fecal Coilform Summary from Selected Locations

Figure 5-2a Fecal Coilform Bacteria in Boulder Creek at the San Lorenzo River, 1985- 2006

Figure 5-2b Bacteria in Boulder Creek at the San Lorenzo River, 2001-2006

Figure 5-3a Fecal Coliform Bacteria in San Lorenzo River at Ben Lomond, 1986-2006

Figure 5-3b Fecal Coliform Bacteria in San Lorenzo River at Ben Lomond, 2001-2006

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5‐ii Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

LIST OF FIGURES (CONT.)

Figure 5-4a Fecal Coliform Bacteria in San Lorenzo River at Big Tress, 1975-2006

Figure 5-4b Fecal Coilform Bacteria in San Lorenzo River at Big Tress, 2001-2006

Figure 5-5a Fecal Coliform Bacteria in San Lorenzo River at Sycamore Grove , 1985- 2006

Figure 5-5b Fecal Coliform Bacteria in San Lorenzo River at Big Trees, 2001-2006

Figure 5-6a Fecal Coliform Bacteria in Zayante Creek at Zayante, 1975-2006

Figure 5-6b Fecal Coliform Bacteria in Zayante Creek at Zayante, 2001-2006

Figure 5-7a Fecal Coliform Trend for the San Lorenzo River at Big Trees, 1988-2006

Figure 5-7b Fecal Coliform Trend for the San Lorenzo River at Big Trees, 2001-2006

Figure 5-8a Annual Median Total Coliform in the Santa Cruz Water Department’s San Lorenzo River Sources, 1974-2006

Figure 5-8b Annual Median Total Coliform in the Santa Cruz Water Department’s San Lorenzo River Sources, 2001-2005

Figure 5-9a Annual Median Total Coliform in the Santa Cruz Water Department’s North Coast Sources, 1974-2006

Figure 5-9b Annual Median Total Coliform in the Santa Cruz Water Department’s North Coast Sources, 2001-2006

Figure 5-10 Turbidity Summary from Selected Sample Locations

Figure 5-11a Monthly Turbidity Summary from San Lorenzo River at Ben Lomond, 1977-2006

Figure 5-11b Monthly Turbidity Summary from San Lorenzo River at Ben Lomond, 2001-2006

Figure 5-12a Raw Water Turbidity Distribution from County Sampling Locations at the San Lorenzo River, 1975-2006

Figure 5-12b Raw Water Turbidity Distribution from County Sampling Locations at the San Lorenzo River, 2001-2006

Figure 5-13a Turbidity in SCWD’s San Lorenzo River Sources, 1967-2006

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5‐iii Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

Figure 5-13b Turbidity in SCWD’s San Lorenzo River Sources, 2001-2006

Figure 5-14a Turbidity in SCWD’s North Coast Sources, 1973-2006

Figure 5-14b Turbidity in SCWD’s North Coast Sources, 2001-2006

Figure 5-15a SCWD’s San Lorenzo River Sources, 1967-2006 (10 point running average shown for clarity.) Data taken at varying intervals.

Figure 5-15b Turbidity in SCWD’s San Lorenzo River Sources, 2001-2006 (10 point running average shown for clarity.) Data taken at varying intervals

Figure 5-16a Turbidity in SCWD’s North Coast Sources, 1973-2006 (10 point running average shown for clarity.) Data taken at varying intervals

Figure 5-16b Turbidity in SCWD’s North Coast Sources, 2001-2006 (10 point running average shown for clarity.) Data taken at varying intervals

Figure 5-17a Raw Water Turbidity Distribution from SCWD’s San Lorenzo River Sources, 1967-2006

Figure 5-17b Raw Water Turbidity Distribution from SCWD’s San Lorenzo River Sources, 2001-2006

Figure 5-18a Raw Water Turbidity Distribution from SCWD’s North Coast Sources, 1973-2006

Figure 5-18b Raw Water Turbidity Distribution from SCWD’s North Coast Sources, 2001-2006

Figure 5-19a Raw Water Turbidity Distribution from SCWD’s North Coast Sources, 1973-2006

Figure 5-19b Median Nitrate Concentrations from Selected Sample Locations

Figure 5-20a Nitrate Concentrations in and around the San Lorenzo River, 1975-2006

Figure 5-20b Nitrate Concentrations in and around the San Lorenzo River, 2001-2006

Figure 5-21 Statistical Nitrate Summary at County Sampling Stations 1975-2006

Figure 5-22a Nitrate Concentrations at the SCWD River Sampling Sites, 1967-2006

Figure 5-22b Nitrate Concentrations at the SCWD River Sampling Sites, 2001-2006

Figure 5-23a Nitrate Concentrations at the SCWD North Coast Sources, 1967-2006

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5‐iv Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

Figure 5-23b Nitrate Concentrations at the SCWD North Coast Sources, 2001-2006

Figure 5-24a TON Measured at the San Lorenzo River at Tait Street, 1967-2006

Figure 5-24b TON Measured at the San Lorenzo River at Tait Street, 2001-2006

Figure 5-25a TON Measured at the San Lorenzo River at Felton Diversion, 1973-2006

Figure 5-25b TON Measured at the San Lorenzo River at Felton Diversion, 2001-2006

Figure 5-26a TON Measured at Loch Lomond, 1978-2006

Figure 5-26b TON Measured at Loch Lomond, 2001-2006

Figure 5-27a TON Measured in Liddell Spring, 1967-2006

Figure 5-27b TON Measured in Liddell Spring, 2001-2006

Figure 5-28a TON Measured in Laguna Creek, 1973-2006

Figure 5-28b TON Measured in Laguna Creek, 2001-2006

Figure 5-29a TON Measured in Majors Creek, 1973-2006

Figure 5-29b TON Measured in Majors Creek, 2001-2006

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5‐v Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

5. WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS AND EVALUATION

5.1 Water Quality Regulations

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and/or state agencies regulate the water quality of drinking water systems. EPA delegates primary enforcement responsibility for drinking water program implementation and enforcement to the State. In California, the Department of Health Services (DHS) is the primacy agency for drinking water regulations. To maintain primacy, the authority to enforce drinking water regulations, under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), DHS must adopt drinking water regulations at least as stringent as the Federal regulations and meet other relevant criteria. State drinking water regulations may be more stringent than the Federal regulations, but not less stringent.

The City of Santa Cruz 1996 Watershed Sanitary Survey provides a detailed account of the development of water quality regulations in the United States. The paragraphs below focus on current and proposed water quality regulations.

Drinking water regulations address both microbial and chemical risks. Microbial risks stem from two sources: pathogens present in the source water, and opportunistic pathogens, typically bacteria, that tend to grow in distribution system materials and consumer plumbing. Diseases of concern from source water include giardiasis and cryptosporidiosis, while opportunistic pathogens include Legionella (which causes Legionnaires disease), Mycobacterium avium infections, and other gastrointestinal upsets.

Chemical risks include reproductive effects, neurological effects, and cancer. The primary regulatory concerns are with chemical compounds formed during disinfection of drinking water (termed disinfection byproducts, or DBPs), synthetic organic contaminants from agricultural or industrial pollution, and trace metals associated with corrosion (e.g., lead, copper, and others).

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-1

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

5.2 Current Surface Water Treatment Regulations

The 1996 sanitary survey and the 2001 update describe a number of regulations that were the most current at the time those documents were written. These regulations still apply. New regulations that have been introduced since those reports merely impose more stringent requirements on water agencies. The two major surface water treatment regulations promulgated in recent years are the Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule and the Stage 2 Disinfectants/Disinfectant Byproducts Rule. These rules are summarized below.

5.2.1 Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) and Disinfectants/Disinfectant Byproducts Rule

Revisions to the existing federal and state Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) have been made through increasingly stringent standards included in new drinking water regulations. The final Federal Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR) was published in the Federal Register on December 16, 1998 and became effective in January 2002. The draft State IESWTR was last revised on August 10, 2006 and is currently in the early stages of the regulatory process. Therefore, the state SWTR and federal IESWTR will continue to apply until the California DHS adopts the federal rule.

In conjunction with the federal IESWTR, the USEPA promulgated another new drinking water regulation on December 16, 1998: the Stage 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 1 D/DBPR). Subsequently, the Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT1ESWTR) was promulgated in January 2002 and became effective in January 2005. The LT1ESWTR rule extends the requirements, included in the IESWTR for systems serving 10,000 or more people, to cover small systems serving less than 10,000 customers. Stage 1 D/DBPR and IESWTR/LT1ESWTR have significantly strengthened the regulatory control of disinfection byproducts formation and microbial pathogens in drinking water. In addition, the USEPA signed the LT2ESWTR and Stage 2 D/DBPR to even further strengthen microbial and DBP control. Promulgation of these new regulations was completed on January 7, 2006. The current implementation schedule for new and upcoming drinking water regulations is listed in Table 5-1.

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-2

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

5.3 Water Quality Constituents of Concern

EPA, as well as DHS, has developed Maximum Contaminant Limits (MCLs) for over 100 organic and inorganic compounds, some occurring naturally in water supplies but many occurring as a result of contamination. Major sources of contamination include discharges from manufacturing processes, leaks from storage or disposal containers, and runoff from areas treated with pesticides. Treatment techniques are available for removing these contaminants from water supplies. Protecting source waters from contamination, however, is often more effective than treatment at eliminating contaminants. A list of MCLs for compounds regulated by EPA and DHS is included in Appendix B.

MCLs are developed based upon a number of factors including health risk, analytical detection limits, effectiveness of the best available treatment, and economic considerations. Maximum contaminant level goals (MCLG) are set at the level in which no adverse health effects are seen; in many cases, this is zero.

5.3.1 Cryptosporidium and Giardia

There have been no significant regulatory changes associated with Giardia since 2001. However, Cryptosporidium is specifically addressed in the IESWTR and in the LT2ESWTR. The IESWTR includes a Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) for Cryptosporidium set at zero, and the treatment technique standard will require systems that use conventional filtration treatment to achieve at least a 2-log removal of Cryptosporidium oocysts. Additionally, the proposed LT2 ESWTR will require facilities to undergo a two-year Cryptosporidium monitoring plan to determine if source water quality requires additional treatment for removal/inactivation.

5.3.2 Turbidity

The IESWTR strengthened previous turbidity performance regulatory requirements. The following are current regulatory standards for turbidity, which serve to demonstrate compliance with pathogen log removal requirements.

Individual Filter Effluent (IFE): Facilities are required to conduct continuous turbidity monitoring for each individual filter and submit an exceptions report to DHS if:

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-3

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

ƒ IFE has a turbidity level greater than 1.0 NTU based on two consecutive measurements taken 15 minutes apart

ƒ IFE turbidity is greater than 0.5 NTU at the end of the first 4 hours of filter operation, based on two consecutive measurements taken 15 minutes apart.

ƒ Combined Filter Effluent (CFE): The turbidity level of the filtered water is required to be less than or equal to 0.3 NTU in at least 95 percent of the measurements taken each month and not to exceed 1.0 NTU at any time. Compliance is based on measurements taken at four-hour intervals.

5.3.3 Disinfection and disinfection byproducts

The current Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule (D/DBPR) for total trihalomethanes (TTHMs) and the five haloacetic acids (HAA5) MCLs are 80 µg/L and 60 µg/L, respectively. The Stage 1 D/DBPR compliance is based on a system-wide running annual average (RAA). The Stage 2 D/DBPR includes more stringent regulatory requirements for TTHM and HAA5. The Stage 2 D/DBPR requires that each water purveyor perform an Initial Distribution System Evaluation (IDSE) to identify locations in their distribution system that are most vulnerable to DBP formation. The RAA MCLs will remain in effect and an additional limit of 80 µg/L of TTHMs and 60 µg/L of HAA5, based on a locational running annual average (LRAA) at sites identified in the IDSE, will be instituted. The draft IDSE plan prepared by SCWD will by submitted by April 1, 2007. It identifies monitoring and other actions necessary to comply with the Stage 2 D/DBPR.

The Stage 1 D/DBPR set MCLs for bromate (10 µg/L), and chlorite (1.0 mg/L). The Stage 2 D/DBPR does not change the existing MCLs for these DBPs. Since the water purveyors do not use ozone or chlorine dioxide at their WTPs, these two MCLs should not impact treatment operations. DBPs are of concern primarily in the distribution system but DBP precursors, discussed below, are related to source water quality.

5.3.4 Total Organic Carbon (TOC)

The Stage 1 D/DBPR requires applicable systems that use conventional filtration treatment to remove a certain target level of TOC (DBP precursor) by enhanced

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-4

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation coagulation. The required removal level is based on Source Water alkalinity and TOC concentration.

There has been no further significant regulatory change associated with this constituent since 2001.

5.3.5 Perchlorate

Although no state or federal MCL currently exists for perchlorate, DHS anticipates promulgating a new final perchlorate MCL in 2007. The proposed regulation is currently in the last stages of the state regulatory process. Until the MCL is in place, DHS will use a 6 µg/L public health goal (PHG) and proposes a 6 µg/L MCL.

5.4 Upcoming Regulations 5.4.1 Upcoming Surface Water Treatment Regulations

No major new federal surface water regulations are anticipated to be finalized in the near future. A variety of new rules and regulations have been proposed but a schedule for promulgation is not available at this time. For a summary of regulations promulgated by EPA since publication of the 1996 sanitary survey, see Table 5-1. During the next five years, state adoption of a number of federal water quality regulations may be the main source of new regulatory requirements for agencies in California. Currently in the State regulatory process are the following: Primary MCL for Perchlorate, Arsenic MCL, Chromium-6 MCL, Cross Connection Control Regulations, ad Recharge/Reuse Regulations.

5.4.2 Upcoming Groundwater Regulations

Although these regulations do not apply to the surface water sources directly within the City’s control, they may be applicable to well sources within the Santa Cruz system (e.g. Tait Wells) and are thus included here for completeness.

5.4.2.1 Radionuclides Rule

The Federal Radionuclides Rule was promulgated in December 7, 2000 and the MCLs published therein became effective in December 2003. Additionally, by the end of 2007,

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-5

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation four quarters of initial monitoring are required for each entry point to the distribution system of agencies treating groundwater. The federal rule will apply to systems in California until the state adopts the promulgated radionuclides rule. The proposed rule has recently undergone a second public-hearing period.

5.4.2.2 Arsenic Rule

The final Federal Arsenic Rule, published by EPA on January 22, 2001, established the MCL for this constituent at 0.010 mg/L (10 µg/L). The Rule was to become effective on March 23, 2001, 60 days after publication. The rule established that the 0.01 mg/L (10 µg/L) MCL becomes effective on January 23, 2006.

The State of California is in the process of developing a revised drinking water standard for arsenic. It is expected that DHS will publish a proposed rule in 2007. It is anticipated that the state MCL will be the same as the federal MCL of 0.01 ppm. A compliance monitoring period for the new rule (both state and federal) began in January 2006.

5.4.2.3 Groundwater Rule

On August 9, 2000 EPA proposed a rule specifying the appropriate use of disinfection in ground water and addresses other components of ground water systems to assure the protection of public health. The Ground Water Rule (GWR) establishes multiple barriers to protect against bacteria and viruses in drinking water obtained groundwater sources and will establish a targeted strategy to identify groundwater systems at high risk for fecal contamination.

At the time of publication of the proposed rule, EPA indicated that the final GWR was scheduled to be issued as a final rule in the spring of 2003. USEPA promulgated the Ground Water Rule in November 2006 after having first proposed the rule in 2000.

There is no California Groundwater Rule yet. Once the Federal Rule is promulgated, the state will begin work on adopting the rule for California.

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-6

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

5.5 Water Quality Evaluation

The following subsections summarize the key water quality concerns in the San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast watersheds based on review of data available from the County of Santa Cruz and SCWD computerized databases. Generally, the discussion focuses on microbiological parameters, turbidity and sediment, and nitrates. Other parameters discussed are odors, organic contamination and general mineral and metals content.

A major reason for emphasizing coliform bacteria, turbidity, and nitrates is because of the findings from previous studies and field surveys and because the River is listed as impaired for each of these parameters, with TMDLs already being implemented (nitrate, sediment) or currently in development (pathogens). Coliform bacteria are the primary microbial group measured to determine the health of a drinking water supply. Total coliform bacteria is considered a good general indicator of contamination but does not indicate specific contamination sources. The turbidity parameter is used commonly in drinking water treatment to quantify water quality, primarily because it is easily measured and provides virtually instantaneous results. Also, high turbidity has been correlated with high protozoa (and bacteria) concentrations in some waters. Nitrate has been a targeted parameter in the subject watersheds, mostly because of the predominance of septic tanks as the domestic wastewater treatment technique. The County has found an increasing nitrate trend since nitrate measurements were initiated in area streams, indicative of the increased urbanization within the area. Most of the nitrate originates from septic tank systems, especially from systems located on or near highly permeable soils. Elevated nitrate levels promote algal growth which, upon decay, produces taste and odor compounds that increase water treatment costs. Nitrate- rich water also favors growth of cyanobacteria, some of which produce harmful toxins.

5.5.1 Coliform bacteria

Coliform bacteria data are evaluated in this subsection. The water utilities which provided data mostly measure total coliform bacteria, with periodic measurement of fecal coliform bacteria, a subset of total coliform bacteria. The County measures, among other microbiological parameters, total and fecal coliform bacteria. DHS has established a guideline to require more rigorous disinfection if monthly median total coliform counts exceed 1,000 MPN/100 ml.

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-7

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

Drinking water and sanitary microbiological experience has established the coliform bacteria group as an indicator of the degree of pollution and sanitary quality of drinking water supplies. The significance of coliform tests and the interpretation of results are well authenticated and have been used as a basis for standards of bacteriological quality of water supplies (Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 21st Edition).

Most drinking water purveyors determine the most probable concentration (MPN) of total coliform bacteria present in the drinking water supply and distribution system. Total coliform bacteria are a relatively broad group, which includes species that can live for extended periods outside a host body. These sometimes-termed “environmental” coliform bacteria are omnipresent in waters exposed to urban development and wildlife activities. Drinking water utilities are required to reinvestigate areas where detectable total coliforms are found in the distribution system, as described in the water quality regulation portion of this section. Sometimes utilities are required to determine if any fecal coliform are present. The presence of fecal coliform in distribution systems can indicate contamination by sewage or an improper disinfection process at the treatment works.

Fecal coliform bacteria can be present in the gut and feces of warm blooded animals and are detected in the laboratory by the characteristic of producing a gas at about 45˚C. This differentiation yields valuable information concerning the possible source of pollution in water sources. However, the presence of fecal coliform can be indicative of any warm blooded animal, such as domestic pets and wild animals.

The fecal coliform to fecal streptococci (FC:FS) ratio has been used to determine if the contamination source originated from human wastes. A ratio greater than 4 was considered indicative of human contamination. Conversely, a ratio less than 0.7 suggested the contamination was non-human related. This tool has been questioned of late because of variable survival rates among the fecal streptococcus species, and some researchers do not recommend the use of the FC:FS ratio to evaluate bacteria origin.

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-8

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

Current efforts to differentiate sources of bacterial contamination focus on use of RNA analysis. The County of Santa Cruz recently using ribotyping, a method of microbiological source tracking that differentiates human E. coli from other types of E. coli, to assess the source and causes of elevated bacteria levels at local beaches (Ricker and Peters, 2006). Overall, of 1200 bacterial isolates tested between 2002 and 2004, only 15 percent could not be attributed to a particular source. Study results relevant to this sanitary survey update include findings that: contamination by birds was a dominant source of bacteria in both upstream and urban (lower River) locations; cracks in storm drains and sewer pipes, as observed by videography, could facilitate cross- contamination; storm drains and sumps appear to promote incubation and multiplication of bacteria; bacteria loadings from human, pet and livestock wastes, while significant, are much lower than avian loadings; and human contributions in the River were much higher in wet weather, when runoff scours storm drains and mobilizes waste from developed areas, encampments and the occasional failing septic system.

5.5.2 County of Santa Cruz

From the County data, we selected the same sample sites analyzed in the 1996 sanitary survey and the 2001 update because of their location upstream or downstream and because of their proximity to key developed areas. The recent microbial source assessment confirms the conclusion of the earlier County wastewater management study (Ricker, 1989) that bacteria levels in the San Lorenzo River were mostly linked to dense development adjacent to the stream channels.

County fecal coliform data for the past 5 years was evaluated for this study. The results are:

ƒ Figure 5-1 illustrates fecal coliform bacteria data from key sample locations. Fecal coliform monthly arithmetic averages are higher at upstream as compared to downstream river sampling sites, and below suburban developed areas. For example, coliform concentrations in the river below Felton are considerably higher than below Henry Cowell Redwoods State Park (compare results for the Big Trees and Sycamore Grove sampling sites) due to natural decay, decreased human activity, and dilution but recent trends show lower concentrations at both types of locations. Small tributaries to the San Lorenzo River have lower naturally- occurring coliforms, due to a lower intensity of human activity and development. Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-9

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

ƒ Higher median and average values in Figures 5-2 through 5-5 generally indicate higher fecal coliform concentrations in the winter months than in summer months, with abrupt fecal coliform increases during the ‘first flush’ and throughout the rainy season. For example, see the relatively high concentrations in November and April in Boulder Creek (Figure 5-2b), in October through December at Ben Lomond (Figure 5-3b), and in October and December at Big Trees (Figure 5-4b). While these three sampling locations are downstream of developed urbanized areas, high average coliform values are also measured in fall months from the Sycamore Grove sampling location (Figure 5-5b).

ƒ Figures 5-6a and b illustrate similar temporal data for Zayante Creek, a tributary draining the sandy soil areas of the watershed. In contrast to the San Lorenzo River samples, higher fecal coliform concentrations at this location occurred during the summer months. The County has previously concluded that subsurface contributions of bacteria do not occur from functioning septic systems (Ricker, 1989), so this difference is most likely attributable to runoff from the developed area. While the pattern of high values in August and September remains unchanged from previous reports, average and median values for other months have decreased slightly over the past five years.

ƒ Figure 5-7a illustrates the data collected for the San Lorenzo River at Big Trees since 1988. No general increase or decrease over the entire period is observed. However, analysis shows a slight increasing trend (Figure 5-7b) over the most recent 5-year period. As discussed above, fecal coliform peaks typically occur during winter periods when rainfall and runoff are high.

5.5.3 Santa Cruz Water Department

The results of our review of SCWD fecal coliform data for the past 5 years are:

ƒ Figures 5-8a and 5-8b show the total coliform annual median values since 1974 for SCWD’s San Lorenzo River and North Coast sources, respectively. The annual median value at the Felton Diversion has exceeded 1,000 MPN/100 ml every year since 1989 (Figure 5-8a). At the other river source at Tait Street, the annual median value exceeded the 1,000 MPN/100 ml threshold 14 times during the same 17-year period. Annual median values at Loch Lomond, which were almost always below 10 MPN/100 ml prior to 1990, have also increased over the past few years. Water diverted at Felton is routed to Loch Lomond and not used directly by SCWD. The increasing annual median values noticeable for almost of the supplies are most likely attributed to increased development in the watersheds. The

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-10

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

transition from a summer home to full-time community probably contributes to total coliform counts in urban runoff. The slight increasing trend for the Loch Lomond Reservoir is probably caused by increased diversions or analytical improvements.

ƒ Figure 5-9a shows the total coliform annual median values since 1974 for SCWD’s North Coast sources (Liddell Spring, Laguna Creek, and Majors Creek). Values are almost a magnitude lower than the Felton Diversion or Tait Street sources, and particularly low at Liddell Spring. However, annual median values for both Laguna Creek and Majors Creek have clearly increased over the past 30 years, likely due to increased development in their respective watersheds. Figure 5-9b shows the trend in annual median values for the past 5 years. Note that the apparent decrease at Liddell Spring results from a reduction in the non-detect level.

SCWD collected raw water samples for both Giardia cyst and Cryptosporidium oocysts from two locations in 1990 (see below):

ƒ The first sample location was the San Lorenzo River at the Tait Street Diversion. The average Giardia cyst and Cryptosporidium oocyst concentrations from this location were 0.14 and 6.5 organisms per 100 liters. Five of the 6 samples for Giardia cysts were non-detectable, and one contained 1 cyst for a 115 liter sample. Only one of the 6 Cryptosporidium oocyst samples was non-detectable and one contained as many as 28 oocysts/100 liters.

ƒ The other raw water sample location was the Graham Hill WTP blended raw water. Of the five samples collected none had detectable Giardia cysts. One of the five samples had a detectable Cryptosporidium oocysts concentration of 1 organism per 314 liters (i.e. 0.3/100 liters).

In 2006, mixed raw water inflow at the Graham Hill WTP was sampled for Giardia cyst and Cryptosporidium oocyst concentrations. On May 15, 2006, 0.1 Giardia cysts/liter and <0.1 Cryptosporidium oocysts/liter were detected. On June 14, 2006, <0.1 Giardia cysts/liter and 0.1 Cryptosporidium oocysts/liter were detected. Additional wet weather sampling is planned for the near future.

Research conducted for other rivers and streams outside of the study area indicate that Giardia cyst concentrations can range from less than 1 to 200 cysts per 100 liters.

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-11

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

Cryptosporidium oocyst concentrations can range from 25 to 250 organisms per 100 liters.

5.6 Turbidity

Anecdotally, many water purveyor and County staff report that treatment problems are caused by turbidity peaks during the wet, winter months. Turbidity monitoring is complicated by the fact that pumps and associated monitoring equipment are shut-off when turbidity during rainfall events exceeds the threshold, such that peak turbidities are not recorded. Installation of stand-alone monitoring equipment at Loch Lomond and the Tait Street intake is currently planned. Disruption of the river and creek beds, small to large landslides, and runoff from barren earth areas tend to extend high turbidity events. These are common occurrences in California caused by the geology, topography, and climate. Many of the water utilities experience treatment problems during the initial few days of high stormwater runoff periods. For example, the SCWD stops using water from the Tait Street Diversion when turbidities exceed about 10 NTU and recommences diversion when levels drop to below 15 NTU. It is often useful to distinguish ‘persistent turbidity’ as a set of issues with different causes and likely responses. The definition of persistent turbidity as accepted by the County is turbidity which precludes diversions for more than about 3 days for smaller streams, and up to 5 days for the San Lorenzo River after a significant storm. In Liddell Spring, according to the 1964 County-CEMEX contract, persistent turbidity is increases in turbidity over the baseline which exceed 2 units for 48 hours following the storm event. Usually, persistent turbidity occurs in streams receiving a continuing supply of fine-grained sediment from banks, tributaries, or cutslopes. The continuing supply often can be traced to a particular disturbance, such as a landslide, poorly-executed timber harvest, road failure, or large wildfire.

Because high turbidity has correlated with increased protozoa concentrations in surface waters, it is prudent to have some contingency treatment plan during the initial “flush” of the wet year. Avoiding highly turbid water and relying on alternative sources in the short-term seems to be good, well-practiced policy.

Streams which experience extensive disturbances (such as might be caused by a major landslide or fire) are often 10 to 100 times as turbid as baseline, or best-case conditions, Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-12

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation at least for the first year or two following the event. The same streams which take longer to clear after a storm are usually also affected by excess turbidity persisting into late spring or early summer. These include creeks downstream from large impoundments which can continue to be turbid for a year or longer.

5.6.1 County of Santa Cruz

The County of Santa Cruz monitors water quality in the San Lorenzo River and its tributaries at numerous locations:

ƒ Figure 5-10 illustrates the average, median, and maximum turbidities measured at selected locations in the valley for the period 2001 to 2006. As can be seen in this figure, the maximum turbidities can sometimes exceed 250 NTU, and older historic data cited in the 1996 WSS showed maximum turbidities exceeding 500 NTU. [Analysis of continuous turbidity monitoring data for 2006 from Newell Creek, upstream of Loch Lomond, show that turbidities exceeded 1,200 NTU in February and April 2006. The continuous monitoring data for 2004-05 from the San Lorenzo River at Tait Street shows that turbidity exceeded 1,550 NTU during the large storm event Dec. 31, 2005. The value of 2,000 NTU on Dec. 24, 2005 does not correspond with the rainfall record.] The median turbidities are low to moderate, usually below 2 NTU, indicating that the River and tributary water is typically treatable and most utilities can meet current turbidity standards with existing treatment technologies.

ƒ Figure 5-11a shows the historic monthly trend of turbidity in the San Lorenzo River in samples collected near Ben Lomond from 1977 to date. As expected, the median turbidities are higher during months of high stormwater runoff. For this site, the warmest and driest typical months, July through September, had average and median turbidities of about 1.0 NTU. The median turbidities for all months were below 4 NTU, indicating that typically, the turbidity is in a range that poses few treatment challenges. More recent data, shown in Figure 5-11b, shows that turbidity has decreased at the Ben Lomond station.

ƒ Figure 5-12a illustrates the historic distribution of turbidity values at four locations along the river. Fifty percent of the samples collected for each site have turbidities less than about 1.5 to 2.0 NTU. Approximately 90 percent of the samples had turbidities less than 10 NTU. More recent data, shown in Figure 5-12b, shows that turbidity has decreased slightly at the Big Trees and Ben Lomond stations. The turbidity data distributions shown in both of these figures are very similar for the four locations. This

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-13

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

may indicate that very little difference of turbidity occurs along the river most of the time. The extreme high turbidities, again, typically occur during stormwater runoff periods.

5.6.2 Santa Cruz Water Department

Data collected by the SCWD since the early 1970s were evaluated for this report. SCWD currently has the capability to use different water sources if turbidity increases for one or more of the sources for reasons other than rainfall (e.g., landslides). During moderate to heavy rain events, however, all surface sources and Liddell Spring must be turned out due to elevated turbidity, leaving Loch Lomond Reservoir as the only source with which to meet customer demands. The evaluation findings are:

ƒ Figure 5-13a and Figure 5-14a show the historic turbidity trends for the River and North Coast sources, respectively. There is no apparent overall increasing or decreasing trend over the entire period and variations appear to be storm-related, as expected. Focusing on more recent data, turbidity in Loch Lomond showed an increasing trend over the period from 2001 to 2006 (Figure 5-13b), whereas turbidities at the two river stations and the North Coast sources (Figure 5-14b) appeared to vary with weather patterns.

ƒ Figures 5-15a and 5-16a show similar data as above, but as a 10 sample running average to clarify the trends. Again, no general increase or decrease is noticeable for turbidity over the past 30 years. However, storm- related turbidity spikes are well-illustrated in these figures. These spikes are more pronounced during normal or wet periods as compared to dry years, such as between 1987 and 1990. The Loch Lomond station appears to show a slight increasing trend over the past five years (Figure 5-15b) but this may simply be storm-related. Turbidities at the two river stations and the North Coast sources (Figure 5-16b) again appeared to vary with weather patterns.

ƒ Figure 5-17a illustrates the distribution of turbidity data collected by SCWD over almost 40 years for the San Lorenzo River sources. Figure 5- 17b shows the same distribution for the 2001-2006 period. Turbidities in Loch Lomond during this period never exceeded 20 NTU, while the turbidity of the river water turbidity exceeded several hundred units on a number of occasions.

ƒ Figure 5-18a illustrates the distribution of turbidity data collected by SCWD over almost 40 years for the North Coast sources. Figure 5-18b Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-14

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

shows the same distribution for the 2001-2006 period. Turbidities in Majors Creek appear to have increased slightly in recent years, with the highest increasing to over 200 NTU.

ƒ The North Coast sources experience significantly less turbidity than the river sources (compare Figures 5-17b and 5-18b). Examining this data from the 2001-2006 period, Liddell Spring and Laguna Creek samples average less than 0.3 NTU, the average Majors Creek turbidity approaches 1 NTU, with about 10 percent exceeding 5 NTU. Overall, these sources provide consistent low turbidity, treatable water.

5.6.3 Nitrate

The MCL for nitrate in drinking water is 10 mg/L as nitrogen, or 45 mg/L as nitrate. The nitrate concentrations in the surface water systems located within the watersheds do not approach this limit. However, in response to the 303(d) listing for nutrient impairment and implementation of the resulting nitrate TMDL, the County and the Regional Board have implemented numerous management and regulatory actions to reduce nitrate loadings to the river and tributary creeks. The primary source of nitrate is from septic leach fields located in sandy soil areas (Santa Margarita sandstone), mostly located east of the San Lorenzo River. Other key sources are septic systems near waterways, a community leach field at the Boulder Creek Country Club, and the Scotts Valley nitrate plume. Table 5-2 summarizes the nitrate data evaluated for this study.

5.6.4 County of Santa Cruz

The County Health Services Agency has intensively studied the nitrate issue and these efforts are fully described in the San Lorenzo Nitrate Management Plan final report (Ricker, 1995). The primary findings and direction of this effort were summarized in a previous section. Nitrate monitoring results are discussed in the following paragraphs.

ƒ Figure 5-19 illustrates the upstream to downstream median nitrate concentrations for selected samples points in the San Lorenzo Valley. This figure shows elevated nitrate values from areas east of the river (i.e., in the Santa Margarita sandstone area) and from Boulder Creek. Also, similar to the fecal coliform data, nitrate decreases as water travels from Felton through the Henry Cowell Redwoods State Park area.

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-15

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

ƒ Figure 5-20a illustrates a trend for nitrate over the past 30 years. This figure shows that more intensive sampling was conducted from the mid- 1980s to the mid-1990s in the San Lorenzo Valley. Seasonal trends seem to indicate abrupt increases during the winter months. Two locations, Bean Creek at Mt. Hermon Road and the San Lorenzo River at Big Trees, have experienced peak nitrate concentrations (single sample concentrations over 1.0 mg/L as N). It is important to compare these values with the nitrate concentrations from an upstream site, the San Lorenzo River at Waterman Gap. The median Waterman Gap nitrate concentration of less than 0.1 mg/L as N is most likely near the background nitrate concentration throughout the valley before the area was developed. More recently, nitrate concentrations in Bean Creek appear to be rising slightly (Figure 5- 20b), while concentrations in the river at the Big Trees station show a seasonal pattern related to rainfall and storm events.

ƒ Figure 5-21 illustrates the statistical difference of the nitrate data for the selected sites shown in Figure 5-19. For each location, the figure shows the minimum, maximum, fiftieth percentile range, median, and average. This figure highlights areas where nitrate contributions are higher; namely Boulder Creek and the creeks in sandy soil areas to the east of the San Lorenzo River.

5.6.5 Santa Cruz Water Department

SCWD has monitored the nitrate levels in their water sources since the late 1960's. Their results for the San Lorenzo River mirror those obtained by the County. Also, the SCWD has observed an increasing nitrate trend in the Liddell Spring source. The following paragraphs described the key findings of the nitrate evaluation.

ƒ Figure 5-22a shows the nitrate trend over the past 40 years for the SCWD diversions in the San Lorenzo River area. All three sites show an overall increasing trend for the period as a whole, with concentrations increasing significantly in the late 1980s, perhaps indicative of lower dilution during this period due to drought conditions. The median values for the two river sources, 0.40 and 0.27 mg/l as N, respectively, are significantly higher than the Loch Lomond median of 0.14 mg/l as N. Again, all values are significantly less than the MCL for nitrate. Data for the 1995-2000 period, discussed in the 2001 update, showed decreasing trends at all three stations. During the most recent five-year period (Figure 5-22b), nitrate concentrations at the Felton and Tait Street sampling points continue to decrease, while Loch Lomond now shows an increasing trend.

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-16

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

ƒ As shown in Figure 5-23a, Liddell Spring has elevated nitrate through the 1980s, with some gradual increase in and following the 1990s. The median pre-1970 concentration is 0.40 mg/l as N. After 1970, the median value increases to 0.50 mg/l as N. Very little development exists upstream of this facility and the source of the nitrate is unknown at this time. The operations of the Bonny Doon quarry may expedite nitrate migration through the soils. The median nitrate concentration in Majors Creek over the 40-year period is 0.27 mg/l as N, also with an increasing trend. Laguna Creek shows a much lower median nitrate concentration of 0.09 mg/l as N, with no trend distinguishable. However, more recent data (Figure 5-23b) indicates a slight increasing trend in Laguna Creek, while median nitrate concentrations in Liddell Spring and Majors Creek appear to be declining.

5.7 Odors

Odors of raw water typically relate to natural organic matter and algae degradation products. The SCWD has extensive data on the Threshold Odor Numbers (TON) parameter. Raw and treated TONs were monitored more aggressively starting in the mid-1980s, primarily because of customer complaints. At the same time, the laboratory shifted from using a modified test with a maximum odor number of 3 to using the TON test for odor, as noted on the attached figures illustrating TON trends from different sources over the entire monitoring period.

SCWD sources have observed a wide range of TONs, some as high as 35. Results include:

ƒ Figure 5-24a (Tait Street), Figure 5-25a (Felton Diversion) and Figure 5-26a (Loch Lomond) illustrate the trend of TON data for the river sources over the past roughly 30 to 40 years. The odors in the SCWD source are mostly described as earthy or musty. These odors are almost always indicative of significant algal growth and decay in the source water. Algae growth is limited by the presence of nutrients in the source water. As previously mentioned, a portion of the algal growth increase in SCWD source waters is attributed to the increase of nitrate in the streams. SCWD most likely experiences worse taste and odors in source waters because of the inherent detention time of the stream water and location downstream in the watershed (Williamson, 1992). For the more recent periods, TON at the Tait Street and Felton Diversion sampling points showed an increasing trend over the 1995-2000 period. TON at both sites appeared to decrease from 2001-2006 (Figures 5-24b and 5-25b). TON at Loch Lomond, which showed a negative trend from 1995-2000, now appears to be increasing slightly (Figure 5-26b). Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-17

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

ƒ TON data for the North Coast sources over the same 30 to 40 year interval is shown in Figure 5-27a (Liddell Spring), Figure 5-28a (Laguna Creek) and 5-29a (Majors Creek). In recent years, TON in Liddell Spring showed an increasing trend over 1995-2000 and this has been maintained during 2001- 2006 (Figure 5-27b). No trend in TON is noticeable from the most recent data on Laguna Creek (Figure 5-28b), while on Majors Creek, TON showed an increasing trend over 1995-2000 and 2001-2006 but the rate of increase appears to be slowing.

5.8 Organic Contaminants

Generally, state-mandated Title 22 sampling reports indicate very little presence of contamination of surface water sources with man-made organic constituents. The three contamination sources described in previous sections, the dry-cleaner and the two service stations, all located in Felton, have discharged PCE, TCE, TPH, benzene and toluene through groundwater to the San Lorenzo River. Trace amounts of these compounds have been detected at the Felton Diversion. All values have been less than the MCL. As previously mentioned in Section 3, corrective and/or modified action at all three sites is currently under review by the RWQCB or in development.

5.9 Miscellaneous Water Quality Parameters

Tables 5-3 through 5-16 summarize the recent historical data for miscellaneous other water quality parameters. The data includes:

ƒ Table 5-3: Total Hardness — Most data indicates that most area surface waters are moderately hard, with values around 125 to 150 mg/l as CaCO3. One SCWD source, Liddell Spring, has average and medium hardness values of about 235 mg/l as CaCO3. This is most likely caused by the extensive limestone (karst) geology in the spring vicinity.

ƒ Table 5-4: Calcium — This table lists similar results as for hardness; moderate values for most sources (e.g., about 50 mg/l) except for Liddell Springs (e.g., almost 80 mg/l).

ƒ Table 5-5: Magnesium — Magnesium concentrations are low compared to calcium. This indicates most of the total hardness is from calcium, as expected considering the geologic formations throughout the watershed area.

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-18

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

ƒ Table 5-6: Sodium — The average sodium content in SCWD waters ranges from about 10 to 30 mg/l

ƒ Table 5-7: Potassium — The typical potassium content in SCWD waters is about 2 to 3 mg/l.

ƒ Table 5-8: Alkalinity — Alkalinity varies widely in SCWD, presumably because of high runoff periods. The average values for Liddell Springs is 193 mg/l as CaCO3, due to karst bedrock geology, and about 90 to 115 mg/l as CaCO3 for the other sources

ƒ Table 5-9: Sulfate — The secondary MCL for sulfate is 250 mg/l. The maximum measured in annual samples of SCWD water was 83 mg/l in Loch Lomond. Averages range from 15 to 72 mg/l.

ƒ Table 5-10: Chloride — The secondary MCL for chloride is 250 mg/l. The maximum measured in SCWD water was 93 mg/l (at Felton). Averages range from 11 to 33 mg/l.

ƒ Table 5-11: Fluoride — The primary MCL for fluoride is 2.0 mg/l (see Appendix B). The maximum value measured in annual samples of SCWD water is 0.40 mg/l in Loch Lomond. Averages range from 0.03 to 0.23 mg/l, with the north coast sources having lower levels than the river.

ƒ Table 5-12: pH — The pH values for SCWD waters have ranged from 7.1 to 8.3 units, a narrower range than was noted in the 1996 WSS, with median values between 7.4 and 8.0.

ƒ Tables 5-13 and 5-14: TDS and Conductivity — The secondary MCL for TDS is 500 mg/l. The maximum value measured in annual samples of SCWD water is 318 mg/l with averages ranging from 211 to 307 mg/l. Conductivity (or specific conductance) can be used as a surrogate parameter for TDS. The secondary MCL for specific conductance is 900 umhos/cm, while the maximum value observed was 660 umhos/cm in Liddell Spring. Median values from all sources have ranged from 275 to 470 umhos/cm.

ƒ Table 5-15: Color — Apparent color of SCWD source waters can be as high as 300 units, with the higher values from the river and Majors Creek sources. Median values range from 1 to 18 units. Treated water typically has very little or no detectable color. Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-19

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 5 Sanitary Survey Water Quality Regulations and Evaluation

ƒ Table 5-16: MBAS (Foaming Agents) — The MCL for MBAS, or foaming agents, in drinking water is 0.5 mg/l. The maximum measured in annual samples of SCWD waters is 0.10 mg/l with averages ranging from 0.00 to 0.07 mg/l.

Section 5 03-09-07.doc 5-20

Table 5-1 Regulatory Schedule

Rules Promulgation Date Compliance Date

Federal IESWTR & Stage 1 D/DBPR December 1998 January 2002 California IESWTR Anticipated in 2007 Anticipated in 2010 California Stage 1 D/DBPR June 2006 2009 Federal Long-term 2 & Stage 2 January 2006 April 2012 D/DBPR(1)

(1) each of these two rules include data collection tasks with “early compliance dates” six months after the publication date for sampling plans, and 24 months after rule promulgation for both data collection and report submission.

Table 5-1 03-09-07.xls; Table 5-1 Table 5-2 Summary of Nitrate Data Evaluated Nitrate (mg/L as N) Sample Dates No. of Utility/Location Average Median Low HighSamples From To

Santa Cruz Water District1 Liddell Spring 0.68 0.60 0.32 2.28 20 2001 2006 Laguna Creek 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.16 16 2001 2006 Majors Creek 0.31 0.34 0.09 0.47 16 2001 2006 Loch Lomond 0.18 0.16 0.05 0.32 16 2001 2006 SLR @ Tait Street 0.28 0.27 0.07 0.41 17 2001 2006 SLR @ Felton Diversion 0.38 0.41 0.15 0.54 17 2001 2006 County (Selected Stations)2 SLR @ Waterman Gap 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.12 11 2001 2003 Boulder Creek @ SLR 0.27 0.28 0.00 0.58 67 2001 2006 SLR @ Ben Lomond 0.21 0.21 0.16 0.26 3 2001 2003 Lompico Creek @ Carrol Ave. 0.22 0.18 0.00 0.64 61 2001 2006 Zayante Creek @ Zayante1 0.16 0.13 0.01 0.56 60 2001 2006 Zayante Creek @ SLR 0.49 0.53 0.01 0.75 63 2001 2006 SLR @ Big Trees 0.37 0.36 0.00 1.42 284 2001 2006 SLR @ Sycamore Grove 0.32 0.30 0.00 2.05 321 2001 2006

1Source: SCWD 2Source: Santa Cruz County

SLR = San Lorenzo River

Note: Excluded value of 479 mg/L on 5/29/03

206081 Table 5-2 Nitrate data 03-09-07.xls ©2007 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

Table 5-3 Total Hardness Summary of Available Data (mg/L as CaCO3) No. Sample Utility/Location Average Median Low High Samples Dates Santa Cruz Water Department Liddell Spring 235.1 234.0 132.0 284.0 129 2001 2005 Laguna Creek 127.0 132.0 42.0 184.0 144 2001 2006 Majors Creek 124.0 130.0 35.0 172.0 138.0 2001 2006 Loch Lomond 156.2 154.0 140.0 190.0 103 2001 2006 SLR @ Tait Street 146.5 150.0 76.0 184.0 122 2001 2005 SLR @ Felton Diversion 147.4 152.0 61.0 178.0 123 2001 2005 Source: SCWD

Table 5-4 Calcium Summary of Available Data (mg/L) No. Utility/Location Average Median Low High Samples Sample Dates Santa Cruz Water Department Liddell Spring 77.8 80.6 69.4 83.3 3 2001 2005 Laguna Creek 47.8 48 47.4 48.1 3 2001 2005 Majors Creek 50.8 50.8 48.6 52.9 3 2001 2005 Loch Lomond 48.0 48.7 45.0 50.2 3 2001 2005 SLR @ Tait Street 44.7 44.6 42.2 47.2 3 2001 2005 SLR @ Felton Diversion 45.4 46.3 42.0 47.8 3 2001 2005 Source: SCWD

Table 5-5 Magnesium Summary of Available Data (mg/L) No. Utility/Location Average Median Low High Samples Sample Dates Santa Cruz Water Department Liddell Spring 7.4 8.2 5.2 8.9 3 2001 2005 Laguna Creek 5.2 5.3 4.9 5.4 3 2001 2005 Majors Creek 3.8 4.0 3.6 4.0 3 2001 2005 Loch Lomond 10.2 9.9 9.8 10.9 3 2001 2005 SLR @ Tait Street 9.2 9.4 8.6 9.5 3 2001 2005 SLR @ Felton Diversion 9.4 9.7 8.6 9.9 3 2001 2005 Source: SCWD

206081 Tables 5-3 to 5-16 03-09-07.doc © 2007 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

Table 5-6 Sodium Summary of Available Data (mg/L) No. Sample Utility/Location Average Median Low High Samples Dates Santa Cruz Water Department Liddell Spring 11.0 10.6 10.3 12.1 3 2001 2005 Laguna Creek 10.0 9.8 9.8 10.4 3 2001 2005 Majors Creek 15.5 15.8 14.5 16.2 3 2001 2005 Loch Lomond 20.7 19.5 19.5 23.1 3 2001 2005 SLR @ Tait Street 26.6 27.5 24.0 28.2 3 2001 2005 SLR @ Felton Diversion 27.1 28.1 23.4 29.8 3 2001 2005 Source: SCWD

Table 5-7 Potassium Summary of Available Data (mg/L) No. Sample Utility/Location Average Median Low High Samples Dates Santa Cruz Water Department Liddell Spring 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.8 2 2001 2004 Laguna Creek 2.0 2.0 1.9 2.0 2 2001 2004 Majors Creek 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.8 2 2001 2004 Loch Lomond 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2 2001 2004 SLR @ Tait Street 2.2 2.2 1.9 2.5 2 2001 2004 SLR @ Felton Diversion 2.3 2.3 2.2 2.3 2 2001 2004 Source: SCWD

Table 5-8 Alkalinity Summary of Available Data (mg/L as CaCO3) No. Sample Utility/Location Average Median Low High Samples Dates Santa Cruz Water Department Liddell Spring 192.8 192.0 90.0 252.0 129 2001 2005 Laguna Creek 114.2 118.0 44.0 143.0 144 2001 2006 Majors Creek 92.5 96.0 32.0 118.0 138 2001 2006 Loch Lomond 106.2 106.0 93.0 126.0 104 2001 2006 SLR @ Tait Street 109.1 113.5 49.0 130.0 122 2001 2005 SLR @ Felton Diversion 110.8 116.0 42.0 134.0 123 2001 2005 Source: SCWD

206081 Tables 5-3 to 5-16 03-09-07.doc © 2007 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

Table 5-9 Sulfate Summary of Available Data (mg/L) No. Utility/Location Average Median Low High Samples Sample Dates Santa Cruz Water Department Liddell Spring 41.2 38.1 33.0 53.8 6 2001 2006 Laguna Creek 15.1 15.8 10.9 17.0 6 2001 2006 Majors Creek 42.0 47.0 21.6 48.0 6 2001 2006 Loch Lomond 72.4 72.1 66.0 83.0 6 2001 2006 SLR @ Tait Street 51.4 48.6 42.9 64.0 6 2001 2006 SLR @ Felton Diversion 51.1 51.2 39.0 65.0 6 2001 2006 Source: SCWD

Table 5-10 Chloride Summary of Available Data (mg/L) No. Utility/Location Average Median Low High Samples Sample Dates Santa Cruz Water Department Liddell Spring 11.9 12.0 11.0 12.4 6 2001 2006 Laguna Creek 10.3 10.1 10.0 11.0 6 2001 2006 Majors Creek 16.4 16.1 16.0 18.0 6 2001 2006 Loch Lomond 12.9 13.0 10.3 14.0 6 2001 2006 SLR @ Tait Street 24.5 25.3 14.5 30.0 6 2001 2006 SLR @ Felton Diversion 23.5 24.0 14.2 31.0 6 2001 2006 Source: SCWD

Table 5-11 Fluoride Summary of Available Data (mg/L) No. Sample Utility/Location Average Median Low High Samples Dates Santa Cruz Water Department Liddell Spring 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.10 6 2001 2006 Laguna Creek 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.10 6 2001 2006 Majors Creek 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.10 6 2001 2006 Loch Lomond 0.29 0.30 0.20 0.40 6 2001 2006 SLR @ Tait Street 0.21 0.20 0.15 0.30 6 2001 2006 SLR @ Felton Diversion 0.23 0.20 0.17 0.30 6 2001 2006 Source: SCWD

206081 Tables 5-3 to 5-16 03-09-07.doc © 2007 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

Table 5-12 Water pH Summary of Available Data (units) No. Utility/Location Average Median Low High Samples Sample Dates Santa Cruz Water Department Liddell Spring 7.4 7.4 7.2 8.3 129 2001 2005 Laguna Creek 8.0 8.0 7.7 8.3 144 2001 2006 Majors Creek 7.8 7.8 7.4 8.1 140 2001 2006 Loch Lomond 7.4 7.4 7.1 8.2 104 2001 2006 SLR @ Tait Street 8.0 8.0 7.6 8.3 122 2001 2005 SLR @ Felton Diversion 7.9 7.9 7.4 8.2 123 2001 2005 Source: SCWD

Table 5-13 Total Dissolved Solids Summary of Available Data (mg/L) No. Utility/Location Average Median Low High Samples Sample Dates Santa Cruz Water Department Liddell Spring 306.6 304.0 297.0 318.0 5 2001 2005 Laguna Creek 211.0 205.0 199.0 233.0 5 2001 2005 Majors Creek 250.4 244.0 232.0 284.0 5 2001 2005 Loch Lomond 264.2 255.0 250.0 305.0 5 2001 2005 SLR @ Tait Street 262.0 255.0 251.0 276.0 5 2001 2005 SLR @ Felton Diversion 274.2 271.0 259.0 291.0 5 2001 2005 Source: SCWD

Table 5-14 Conductivity Summary of Available Data (µmho/cm) No. Utility/Location Average Median Low High Samples Sample Dates Santa Cruz Water Department Liddell Spring 483.9 470.0 375.0 660.0 128 2001 2005 Laguna Creek 270.2 275.0 110.0 365.0 144 2001 2006 Majors Creek 296.6 300.0 102.0 430.0 140 2001 2006 Loch Lomond 379.5 370.0 295.0 475.0 103 2001 2006 SLR @ Tait Street 385.3 382.5 180.0 500.0 122 2001 2005 SLR @ Felton Diversion 390.9 390.0 170.0 510.0 123 2001 2005

206081 Tables 5-3 to 5-16 03-09-07.doc © 2007 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

Table 5-15 Apparent Color Summary of Available Data (units) No. Utility/Location Average Median Low High Samples Sample Dates Santa Cruz Water Department Liddell Spring 2.5 1.0 1.0 100.0 151 2001 2005 Laguna Creek 4.8 4.0 2.0 40.0 144 2001 2006 Majors Creek 15.1 8.0 2.0 300.0 140 2001 2006 Loch Lomond 20.4 18.0 4.0 48.0 103 2001 2006 SLR @ Tait Street 20.3 14.0 4.0 200.0 121 2001 2005 SLR @ Felton Diversion 20.5 14.0 4.0 200.0 123 2001 2005 Source: SCWD

Table 5-16 MBAS Summary of Available Data (mg/L) No. Utility/Location Average Median Low High Samples Sample Dates Santa Cruz Water Department Liddell Spring 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.08 5 2001 2005 Laguna Creek 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 2001 2005 Majors Creek 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 2001 2005 Loch Lomond 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.08 5 2001 2005 SLR @ Tait Street 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.10 5 2001 2005 SLR @ Felton Diversion 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.10 5 2001 2005 Source: SCWD

206081 Tables 5-3 to 5-16 03-09-07.doc © 2007 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

Legend: Castle Rock Results: Average/Median/Maximum Units: mpn/100 ml State Park Less than detection limit values were factored as '0'

r

e

v Sources: i

R * Santa Cruz Water District Data 2001-2006 o z n ** Santa Cruz County Data 2001-2006 ! re Waterman Gap o L n a S

B o u ld e r C re e k B ea r C r e e k k ee k r Redwood e C M e l 0 ³ 12,000 r a C l r e e C Grove ar re ! B w ek e ohnston o N J Cree w k T Scale: Feet

SLR @ Boulder Creek** 223.9/164.0/2,190.0 Lompico Creek @ Carrol** !Boulder Creek 279.2/104.0/4,180.0

S an Lo C re le n ar C k z re e o ! R Lompico iv e k r e GF

e k r e e C r

l l C e te w n e a y N !a Z Zayante Ma ns F on a Cr ll C e r e ! e k Olympia e k

!Felton Cree k Benn Bea n ett Creek Felton Diversion (SCWD) reek ill C Shingle M GF

Liddell Spring (SCWD) Henry Cowell Bean Creek @ Mt. Hermon** GF GF Redwoods GF State Park 250.0/250.0/250.0

SLR @ Big Trees** P 218.4/130.0/3,492.0 a Majors Creek (SCWD) P! c GF Tait Well #3 Tait Well #1 i k f e @ e A@ i r GF S c C a rs n

jo L a SLR @ Sycamore Grove** o M r e O n 143.6/60.0/5,000.0 z o c R e iv e a r n

Santa Cruz GIS Data Source: Santa Cruz County

! Area Locations Santa Cruz City Water Supply Watersheds Fecal Coliform Summary ! P Graham Hill WTP General Urbanized Areas from Selected Sample Locations GF Santa Cruz Water Department Diversions Designated Open Space

A@ City of Santa Cruz Wells (GWUDI only) Figure 5.1 1400

1200 Average Median 1000

800

Due to a measurement of 7410 MPN/100ml on 2/12/2003 600 Fecal Coliform, MPN/100ml 400

200

0 Jul Apr Oct Jun Jan Feb Mar Aug Sep Nov Dec May Month

Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-2a. Fecal Coliform Bacteria in Boulder Creek at the San Lorenzo River, 1985-2006

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-2a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1400

1200 Due to a measurement of 7410 MPN/100ml on 2/12/2003 Average Median 1000

800

600 Fecal Coliform, MPN/100ml 400

200

0 Jul Apr Oct Jun Jan Feb Mar Aug Sep Nov Dec May Month Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-2b. Fecal Coliform Bacteria in Boulder Creek at the San Lorenzo River, 2001-2006

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-2b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1400

1200 Average Median

1000

800

600

Fecal Coliform, MPN/100ml 400

200

0 Jul Oct Apr Jan Jun Mar Feb Aug Sep Nov Dec May Month Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-3a. Fecal Coliform Bacteria in the San Lorenzo River at Ben Lomond, 1986-2006

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-3a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1400

1200 Average Median 1000

800

600

` Fecal Coliform, MPN/100ml 400

200

0 Jul Oct Apr Jan Jun Mar Feb Aug Sep Nov Dec May Month Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-3b. Fecal Coliform Bacteria in the San Lorenzo River at Ben Lomond, 2001-2006

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-3b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1400

2190 MPN/100ml Average 1200 Median 1938 MPN/100ml

1000

800

600

Fecal Coliform, MPN/100ml 400

200

0 Jul Oct Apr Jan Jun Mar Feb Aug Sep Nov Dec May Month Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-4a. Fecal Coliform Bacteria in the San Lorenzo River at Big Trees, 1975-2006

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-4a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1400

Average 1200 Median

1000

800

600

Fecal Coliform, MPN/100ml 400

200

0 Jul Oct Apr Jan Jun Mar Feb Aug Sep Nov Dec May Month Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-4b. Fecal Coliform Bacteria in the San Lorenzo River at Big Trees, 2001-2006

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-4b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1400 Average Median 1200

1000

800

600

Fecal Coliform, MPN/100ml 400

200

0 Jul Oct Apr Jan Jun Mar Feb Aug Sep Nov Dec May Month Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-5a. Fecal Coliform Bacteria in the San Lorenzo River at Sycamore Grove, 1985-2006

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-5a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1400

1200 Average Median 1000

800

600

Fecal Coliform, MPN/100ml 400

200

0 Jul Oct Apr Jan Jun Mar Feb Aug Sep Nov Dec May Month Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-5b. Fecal Coliform Bacteria in the San Lorenzo River at Sycamore Grove, 2001-2006

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-5b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1400

Average 1200 Median

1000

800

600

Fecal Coliform, MPN/100ml 400

200

0 Jul Oct Apr Jan Jun Mar Feb Aug Sep Nov Dec May Month Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-6a. Fecal Coliform Bacteria in Zayante Creek at Zayante, 1975-2006

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-6a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1400

Average 1200 Median

1000

800

600

Fecal Coliform, MPN/100ml 400

200

0 Jul Oct Apr Jan Jun Mar Feb Aug Sep Nov Dec May Month Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-6b. Fecal Coliform Bacteria in Zayante Creek at Zayante, 2001-2006

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-6b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 100000.0

10000.0

1000.0

100.0 Fecal Coliform, MPN/100ml

10.0

1.0 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Date Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-7a. Fecal Coliform Trend for the San Lorenzo River at Big Trees, 1988-2006

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-7a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 10000.0

1000.0

100.0 Fecal Coliform, MPN/100ml 10.0

1.0 6/1/2000 9/8/2004 1/6/2005 5/6/2005 9/3/2005 1/1/2006 5/1/2006 9/29/2000 1/27/2001 5/27/2001 9/24/2001 1/22/2002 5/22/2002 9/19/2002 1/17/2003 5/17/2003 9/14/2003 1/12/2004 5/11/2004 8/29/2006 12/27/2006 Date

Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-7b. Fecal Coliform Trend for the San Lorenzo River at Big Trees, 2001-2006 Values greater than 300-500 MPN/100ml are all associated with storm events.

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-7b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 10000.0 Loch Lomond SLR @ Felton Diversion SLR @ Tait Street

1000.0

100.0

10.0 Total Coliform, MPN/100ml Coliform, Total

1.0

0.1 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Date Source: SCWD

Figure 5-8a. Annual Median Total Coliforms in the Santa Cruz Water Department's San Lorenzo River Sources, 1974-2006 Common maximum thresholds for data analysis were 16, 2400, and 24000 MPN/100ml. Common minimum thresholds for data analysis were 1.1, 2.1, 2.2, and 4.5 MPN/100ml.

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-8a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 10000.0 Loch Lomond SLR @ Felton Diversion SLR @ Tait Street

1000.0

100.0

10.0 Total Coliform, MPN/100ml Coliform, Total

1.0

0.1 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Date Source: SCWD

Figure 5-8b.Annual Median Total Coliforms in the Santa Cruz Water Department's San Lorenzo River Sources, 2001-2005 Common maximum thresholds for data analysis were 16, 2400, and 24000 MPN/100ml. Common minimum thresholds for data analysis were 1.1, 2.1, 2.2, and 4.5 MPN/100ml.

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-8b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1000.0 Liddell Spring Laguna Creek Majors Creek

100.0

10.0 Total Coliform, MPN/100ml

1.0

0.1 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Date Source: SCWD

Figure 5-9a. Annual Median Total Coliforms in the Santa Cruz Water Department's North Coast Sources, 1974-2006 Non-detect level changed from 2.2 to 1.1 MPN/100ml in 2002 Common maximum thresholds for data analysis were 16, 2400, and 24000 MPN/100ml. Common minimum thresholds for data analysis were 1.1, 2.1, 2.2, and 4.5 MPN/100ml.

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-9a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1000.0 Liddell Spring Laguna Creek Majors Creek

100.0

10.0 Total Coliform, MPN/100ml Coliform, Total 1.0

0.1 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Date Source: SCWD Figure 5-9b. Annual Median Total Coliforms in the Santa Cruz Water Department's North Coast Sources, 2001-2006 Non-detect level changed from 2.2 to 1.1 MPN/100ml in 2002 Common maximum thresholds for data analysis were 16, 2400, and 24000 MPN/100ml. Common minimum thresholds for data analysis were 1.1, 2.1, 2.2, and 4.5 MPN/100ml.

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-9b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Legend: Castle Rock Results: Average/Median/Maximum State Park Units: NTU

r Sources:

e

v i * Santa Cruz Water District Data 2001-2006 R

o ** Santa Cruz County Data 2001-2006 z n ! re Waterman Gap o L n a S

B o u ld e r C re e k B ea r C r e e k k ee k r e C M e Redwood r l 0 ³ 12,000 a C l r e e C ar re Grove ! B w ek e ohnston o N J Cree w k T Newell Creek** Scale: Feet 6.81/6.60/15.10 SLR @ Boulder Creek** 6.96/1.00/276.00 Lompico Creek @ Carrol** !Boulder Creek 1.95/0.60/25.10

S an Lo C re le n ar C k z re e o ! R Lompico iv e k r e GF

e k r e e C r

l l C e te w n e a y N !a F Z a M Zayante ll an C so n C re re ek e k !Olympia SLR @ Felton* 4.82/1.44/91.70 ! Felton ree k Bea n C

Felton Diversion (SCWD) GF Liddell Spring Intake* 0.93/0.23/34.20 Henry Cowell Bean Creek @ Mt. Hermon** GF GF Redwoods GF State Park 4.57/3.90/9.00 Laguna Creek Intake* 0.62/0.24/21.50

P a SLR @ Big Trees** P! c 6.51/1.32/232.00 GF i Majors Creek (SCWD) Tait Well #3 Tait Well #1 f i AGF@ c Majors Creek Intake*

6.29/0.81/232.00 SLR @ Sycamore Grove** SLR @ Tait St. Diversion* O 5.06/1.20/151.00 6.24/1.33/230.00 c e a n

Santa Cruz GIS Data Source: Santa Cruz County

! Area Locations Santa Cruz City Water Supply Watersheds Turbidity Summary P! Graham Hill WTP General Urbanized Areas from Selected Sample Locations GF Santa Cruz Water Department Diversions Designated Open Space

A@ City of Santa Cruz Wells (GWUDI only) Figure 5.10 12.0

Average Median 10.0

8.0

6.0

River Turbidity, NTU 4.0

2.0

0.0 Jul Oct Apr Jan Jun Mar Feb Aug Sep Nov Dec May Month Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-11a. Monthly Turbidity Summary in the San Lorenzo River at Ben Lomond, 1977-2006

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-11a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 25.0

20.0 Average Median

15.0

10.0 River Turbidity, NTU

5.0

0.0 Jul Oct Apr Jan Jun Mar Feb Aug Sep Nov Dec May Month Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-11b. Monthly Turbidity Summary in the San Lorenzo River at Ben Lomond, 2001-2006

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-11b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 100.0

SLR @ Sycamore Grove SLR @ Big Trees SLR @ Ben Lomond Boulder Creek @ SLR

10.0 Turbidity, NTU Turbidity,

1.0

0.1 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% Percent of Samples with Less Than Turbidity Value

Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-12a. Raw Water Turbidity Distribution from County Sampling Locations at the San Lorenzo River, 1975-2006

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-12a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 100.0

SLR @ Sycamore Grove SLR @ Big Trees SLR @ Ben Lomond Boulder Creek @ SLR

10.0 Turbidity, NTU Turbidity,

1.0

0.1 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% Percent of Samples with Less Than Turbidity Value

Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-12b. Raw Water Turbidity Distribution from County Sampling Locations at the San Lorenzo River, 2001-2006

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-12b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1000.0 Loch Lomond SLR @ Tait Street SLR @ Felton Diversion

100.0

10.0 Turbidity, NTU

1.0

0.1 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Date

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-13a. Turbidity in SCWD's San Lorenzo River Sources, 1967-2006

206081 Turbidity Figures-City data.xls, Fig5-13a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1000.0 Loch Lomond SLR @ Tait Street SLR @ Felton Diversion

100.0

10.0 Turbidity, NTU

1.0

0.1 1/1/2001 5/1/2001 8/8/2005 4/5/2006 8/3/2006 8/29/2001 4/26/2002 8/24/2002 4/21/2003 8/19/2003 4/15/2004 8/13/2004 4/10/2005 12/6/2005 12/1/2006 12/27/2001 12/22/2002 12/17/2003 12/11/2004 Date Source: SCWD

Figure 5-13b. Turbidity in SCWD's San Lorenzo River Sources, 2001-2006

206081 Turbidity Figures-City data.xls, Fig5-13b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1000.0 Liddell Spring Laguna Creek Majors Creek

100.0

10.0 Turbidity, NTU

1.0

0.1 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Date

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-14a. Turbidity in SCWD's North Coast Sources, 1973-2006

206081 Turbidity Figures-City data.xls, Fig5-14a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1000.0 Liddell Spring Laguna Creek Majors Creek

100.0

10.0 Turbidity, NTU

1.0

0.1 1/1/2001 5/1/2001 8/8/2005 4/5/2006 8/3/2006 8/29/2001 4/26/2002 8/24/2002 4/21/2003 8/19/2003 4/15/2004 8/13/2004 4/10/2005 12/6/2005 12/1/2006 12/27/2001 12/22/2002 12/17/2003 12/11/2004 Date Source: SCWD

Figure 5-14b. Turbidity in SCWD's North Coast Sources, 2001-2006

206081 Turbidity Figures-City data.xls, Fig5-14b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1000.0 Loch Lomond SLR @ Tait Street SLR @ Felton Diversion

100.0

10.0 Turbidity, NTU

1.0

0.1 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Date

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-15a. Turbidity in SCWD's San Lorenzo River Sources, 1967-2006 10 point running average shown for clarity. Data taken at varying intervals.

206081 Turbidity Figures-City data.xls, Fig5-15a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1000.0 Loch Lomond SLR @ Tait Street SLR @ Felton Diversion

100.0

10.0 Turbidity, NTU

1.0

0.1 1/1/2001 5/1/2001 8/8/2005 4/5/2006 8/3/2006 8/29/2001 4/26/2002 8/24/2002 4/21/2003 8/19/2003 4/15/2004 8/13/2004 4/10/2005 12/6/2005 12/1/2006 12/27/2001 12/22/2002 12/17/2003 12/11/2004 Date Source: SCWD

Figure 5-15b. Turbidity in SCWD's San Lorenzo River Sources, 2001-2006 10 point running average shown for clarity Data taken at varying intervals.

206081 Turbidity Figures-City data.xls, Fig5-15b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1000.0 Liddell Spring Laguna Creek Majors Creek

100.0

10.0 Turbidity, NTU

1.0

0.1 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Date

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-16a. Turbidity in SCWD's North Coast Sources, 1973-2006 10 point running average shown for clarity Data taken at varying intervals.

206081 Turbidity Figures-City data.xls, Fig5-16a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1000.0 Liddell Spring Laguna Creek Majors Creek

100.0

10.0 Turbidity, NTU Turbidity,

1.0

0.1 1/1/2001 5/1/2001 8/8/2005 4/5/2006 8/3/2006 8/29/2001 4/26/2002 8/24/2002 4/21/2003 8/19/2003 4/15/2004 8/13/2004 4/10/2005 12/6/2005 12/1/2006 12/27/2001 12/22/2002 12/17/2003 12/11/2004 Date Source: SCWD

Figure 5-16b. Turbidity in SCWD's North Coast Sources, 2001-2006 10 point running average shown for clarity Data taken at varying intervals.

206081 Turbidity Figures-City data.xls, Fig5-16b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1000.0 Loch Lomond SLR @ Tait Street SLR @ Felton Diversion

100.0

10.0 Turbidity, NTU

1.0

0.1 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percent of Samples with Less Than Turbidity Value

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-17a. Raw Water Turbidity Distribution from SCWD's San Lorenzo River Sources, 1967-2006

206081 Turbidity Figures-City data.xls, Fig5-17a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1000.0 Loch Lomond SLR @ Tait Street SLR @ Felton Diversion

100.0

10.0 Turbidity, NTU

1.0

0.1 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percent of Samples with Less Than Turbidity Value

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-17b. Raw Water Turbidity Distribution from SCWD's San Lorenzo River Sources, 2001-2006

206081 Turbidity Figures-City data.xls, Fig5-17b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1000.0 Liddell Spring Laguna Creek Majors Creek

100.0

10.0 Turbidity, NTU

1.0

0.1 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percent of Samples with Less Than Turbidity Value

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-18a. Raw Water Turbidity Distribution from SCWD's North Coast Sources, 1973-2006

206081 Turbidity Figures-City data.xls, Fig5-18a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1000.0 Liddell Spring Laguna Creek Majors Creek

100.0

10.0 Turbidity, NTU

1.0

0.1 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percent of Samples with Less Than Turbidity Value

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-18b. Raw Water Turbidity Distribution from SCWD's North Coast Sources, 2001-2006

206081 Turbidity Figures-City data.xls, Fig5-18b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Legend: SLR @ Waterman Gap** Castle Rock Results: average/median/maximum 0.04/0.03/0.12 Units: mg/L State Park Less than detection limit values were factored as '0' for Sweetwater Creek r

e

v i

R Sources: o z n * Santa Cruz Water District Data 2001-2006 ! re Waterman Gap o ** Santa Cruz County Data 2001-2006 L n a S

B o u ld e r C re e k B ea r C r e e k k ee k r Redwood e C M e l r l 0 ³ 12,000 a C r e e C Grove ar re ! B w ek e ohnston o N J Cree w k T Scale: Feet

SLR @ Boulder Creek** 0.15/0.15/0.30 Lompico Creek @ Carrol** !Boulder Creek 0.22/0.18/0.64

S an Lo C re le n ar C k z re e o ! R Lompico iv e k r e GF

e k r e e C r

l l C e te w n e a y N !a F Z Zayante a M l an l so C n C re re ek e k !Olympia SLR @ Felton* 0.38/0.41/0.54 ! Felton ree k Bea n C

R

e Felton Diversion (SCWD) GF g

g

i h a G d G ulc Liddell Spring Intake* r ol d o

0.68/0.60/2.28 C r e Laguna Creek (SCWD) Henry Cowell e Bean Creek @ Mt. Hermon** k Redwoods GF GFGF rs ajo Cre State Park 0.44/0.41/0.75 M e Laguna Creek Intake* k 0.10/0.10/0.16

P Majors Creek (SCWD) a P! c GF i Tait Well #3 Tait Well #1 f i Majors Creek Intake* AGF@ c0.31/0.34/0.47 SLR @ Tait St. Diversion* SLR @ Sycamore Grove** 0.28/0.27/0.41 O 0.32/0.30/2.05 c e a n

Santa Cruz GIS Data Source: Santa Cruz County

! Area Locations Santa Cruz City Water Supply Watersheds Median Nitrate Concentrations P! Graham Hill WTP General Urbanized Areas from Selected Sample Locations GF Santa Cruz Water Department Diversions Designated Open Space

A@ City of Santa Cruz Wells (GWUDI only) Figure 5.19 1.4

SLR @ Waterman Gap 1.2 Bean Creek @ Mt. Hermon Road SLR @ Big Trees

1.0

0.8

0.6 Nitrate, mg/L as Nitrogen 0.4

0.2

Waterman Gap - Approximate Baseline 0.0 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Date Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-20a. Nitrate Concentrations in and around the San Lorenzo River, 1975-2006 10 point running average shown for clarity. Data taken at varying intervals. Data taken more frequently after 1990 at Bean Creek and Waterman Gap.

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-20a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1.4

SLR @ Waterman Gap 1.2 Bean Creek @ Mt. Hermon Road SLR @ Big Trees

1.0

0.8

0.6 Nitrate, mg/L as Nitrogen 0.4

0.2 Waterman Gap - Approximate Baseline

0.0 1/1/2001 5/1/2001 8/8/2005 4/5/2006 8/29/2001 4/26/2002 8/24/2002 4/21/2003 8/19/2003 4/15/2004 8/13/2004 4/10/2005 12/6/2005 12/27/2001 12/22/2002 12/17/2003 12/11/2004

Date Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-20b. Nitrate Concentrations in and around the San Lorenzo River, 2001-2006 10 point running average shown for clarity Data taken at varying intervals.

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-20b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 3 Average 7 mg/L Median 2.5

2

1.5

1 Nitrate, mg/L as Nitrogen

0.5

0 SLR @ Boulder Cr. SLR Above Newell Lompico Zayante Bean Cr. @ Zayante SLR @ Big Gold Gulch SLR @ Waterman @ SLR Love Cr. Creek @ Creek Creek Mt. Hermon Creek @ Trees @ SLR Sycamore Gap SLR SLR Source: Santa Cruz County

Figure 5-21. Statistical Nitrate Summary at County Sampling Stations 1975-2006 Box plots represent the 50th percentile ranges for each site. Whisker plots represent the minimum and maximum values for each site. Excludes value of 479 mg/L on 5/29/03 for Zayante Creek @ SLR.

206081 Figures-County data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-21 ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1.0

Loch Lomond SLR @ Felton Diversion 0.8 SLR @ Tait Street

0.6

0.4

Felton Diversion (0.40 mg/L) Nitrate, mg/L as Nitrogen

0.2

Tait Street (0.27 mg/L) Loch Lomond (0.14 mg/L)

0.0 1967 1968 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Date

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-22a. Nitrate Concentrations in the SCWD River Sampling Sites, 1967-2006 Numbers in parenthesis are median values. Trend lines drawn for each site.

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-22a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 1.0

Loch Lomond SLR @ Felton Diversion

0.8 SLR @ Tait Street

0.6

0.4 Felton Diverison (0.41 mg/L)

Nitrate, mg/L as Nitrogen Tait Street (0.27 mg/L)

0.2 Loch Lomond (0.16 mg/L)

0.0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Date

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-22b. Nitrate Concentrations in the SCWD River Sampling Sites, 2001-2006 Numbers in parenthesis are median values. Trend lines drawn for each site.

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-22b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 2.5

Liddell Spring Laguna Creek

2.0 Majors Creek Li (Lidd ll

1.5

1.0 Nitrate, mg/L as Nitrogen

0.5 Liddell Spring (0.40/0.50 mg/L) Majors Creek (0.27 mg/L)

Laguna Creek (0.09 mg/L) 0.0 1967 1968 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Date

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-23a. Nitrate Concentrations in the SCWD North Coast Sources, 1967-2006 Numbers in parenthesis are median values. Second Liddell Spring value indicated median after 1970. Trend lines drawn for each site.

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-23a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 2.5

2.0 Liddell Spring Laguna Creek Majors Creek Li (Lidd ll 1.5

1.0 Nitrate, mg/L as Nitrogen Liddell Spring (0.60 mg/L)

0.5

Majors Creek (0.34 mg/L)

Laguna Creek (0.10 mg/L) 0.0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Date

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-23b. Nitrate Concentrations in the SCWD North Coast Sources, 2001-2006 Numbers in parenthesis are median values. Trend lines drawn for each site.

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-23b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 110.0 Alternative Method TON Method 100.0 (Max odor number usually set at 3) 90.0

80.0

70.0

60.0

50.0

40.0 Threshold Odor Number 30.0

20.0

10.0

0.0 1967 1968 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Date

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-24a. TON Measured at the San Lorenzo River at Tait Street, 1967-2006

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-24a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 110.0

100.0

90.0

80.0

70.0

60.0

50.0

40.0

Threshold Odor Number 30.0

20.0

10.0

0.0 1/1/2001 5/1/2001 8/8/2005 4/5/2006 8/3/2006 8/29/2001 4/26/2002 8/24/2002 4/21/2003 8/19/2003 4/15/2004 8/13/2004 4/10/2005 12/6/2005 12/1/2006 12/27/2001 12/22/2002 12/17/2003 12/11/2004 Date Source: SCWD

Figure 5-24b. TON Measured at the San Lorenzo River at Tait Street, 2001-2006 Trend line shown.

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-24b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 110.0 Alternative Method TON Method 100.0 (Max odor number usually set at 3) 90.0

80.0

70.0

60.0

50.0

40.0 Threshold Odor Number 30.0

20.0

10.0

0.0 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Date

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-25a. TON Measured at the San Lorenzo River at Felton Diversion, 1973-2006

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-25a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 110.0

100.0

90.0

80.0

70.0

60.0

50.0

40.0

Threshold Odor Number 30.0

20.0

10.0

0.0 1/1/2001 5/1/2001 8/8/2005 4/5/2006 8/3/2006 8/29/2001 4/26/2002 8/24/2002 4/21/2003 8/19/2003 4/15/2004 8/13/2004 4/10/2005 12/6/2005 12/1/2006 12/27/2001 12/22/2002 12/17/2003 12/11/2004 Date Source: SCWD

Figure 5-25b. TON Measured at the San Lorenzo River at Felton Diversion, 2001-2006 Trend line shown.

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-25b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 60.0 Alternative Method TON Method (Max odor number usually set at 3) 50.0

40.0

30.0

20.0 Threshold Odor Number

10.0

0.0 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Date

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-26a. TON Measured at Loch Lomond, 1978-2006

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-26a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 60.0

50.0

40.0

30.0

20.0 Threshold Odor Number

10.0

0.0 1/1/2001 5/1/2001 8/8/2005 4/5/2006 8/3/2006 8/29/2001 4/26/2002 8/24/2002 4/21/2003 8/19/2003 4/15/2004 8/13/2004 4/10/2005 12/6/2005 12/1/2006 12/27/2001 12/22/2002 12/17/2003 12/11/2004 Date Source: SCWD

Figure 5-26b. TON Measured at Loch Lomond, 2001-2006 Trend line shown.

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-26b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 20.0 Alternative Method TON Method (Max odor number usually set at 3)

15.0

10.0 Threshold Odor Number 5.0

0.0 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Date

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-27a. TON Measured in Liddell Spring, 1967-2006

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-27a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 4.5

3.0

1.5 Threshold Odor Number

0.0 1/1/00 4/9/04 8/7/04 4/4/05 8/2/05 4/30/00 8/28/00 4/25/01 8/23/01 4/20/02 8/18/02 4/15/03 8/13/03 12/5/04 3/30/06 7/28/06 12/26/00 12/21/01 12/16/02 12/11/03 11/30/05 11/25/06 Date

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-27b. TON Measured in Liddell Spring, 2001-2006 Trend line shown.

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-27b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 20.0 Alternative Method TON Method (Max odor number usually set at 3)

15.0

10.0 Threshold Odor Number 5.0

0.0 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Date

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-28a. TON Measured in Laguna Creek, 1973-2006 Excludes point on 1/10/83 from record (274 TON) in keeping with 1996 report.

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-28a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 15.0

10.0

5.0 Threshold Odor Number

0.0 1/1/2001 5/1/2001 8/8/2005 4/5/2006 8/3/2006 8/29/2001 4/26/2002 8/24/2002 4/21/2003 8/19/2003 4/15/2004 8/13/2004 4/10/2005 12/6/2005 12/1/2006 12/27/2001 12/22/2002 12/17/2003 12/11/2004 Date Source: SCWD

Figure 5-28b. TON Measured in Laguna Creek, 2001-2006 Trend line shown.

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-28b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. 60.0 Alternative Method TON Method (Max odor number usually set at 3) 50.0

40.0

30.0

20.0 Threshold Odor Number

10.0

0.0 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Date

Source: SCWD

Figure 5-29a. TON Measured in Majors Creek, 1973-2006

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-29a ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

20.0

15.0

10.0 Threshold Odor Number 5.0

0.0 1/1/2001 5/1/2001 8/8/2005 4/5/2006 8/3/2006 8/29/2001 4/26/2002 8/24/2002 4/21/2003 8/19/2003 4/15/2004 8/13/2004 4/10/2005 12/6/2005 12/1/2006 12/27/2001 12/22/2002 12/17/2003 12/11/2004 Date Source: SCWD

Figure 5-29b. TON Measured in Majors Creek, 2001-2006 Trend line shown.

206081 Figures-City data 03-09-07.xls, Fig5-29b ©2006 Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

TABLE OF CONTENTS 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...... 1

6.1 CONCLUSIONS ...... 1 6.1.1 SWTR disinfection compliance requirements ...... 1 6.1.2 Significant contaminant sources...... 2 6.1.2.1 Wastewater and urban runoff ...... 3 6.1.2.2 Confined animal facilities ...... 4 6.1.2.3 Unauthorized activity...... 4 6.1.2.4 Roads ...... 5 6.1.3 Potential contaminant sources not significant...... 7 6.1.3.1 Agricultural land use...... 8 6.1.3.2 Grazing animals and livestock ...... 8 6.1.3.3 Pesticides and herbicides...... 8 6.1.3.4 Solid or hazardous waste facilities ...... 8 6.1.3.5 Recreational uses ...... 8 6.1.3.6 NPDES Point Sources...... 8 6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 10 6.2.1 Wastewater discharges ...... 10 6.2.2 Urban runoff...... 11 6.2.3 Confined animal facilities...... 11 6.2.4 Unauthorized activities...... 12 6.2.5 Quarries and mines ...... 12 6.2.6 Roadway maintenance...... 12 6.2.7 Timber harvests ...... 13 6.2.8 Fire ...... 14 6.2.9 Water-quality monitoring ...... 14 6.2.10 Emergency plans...... 15 6.2.11 Small system treatment systems ...... 15 6.2.12 Watershed management practices ...... 16 6.2.12.1 Water utilities...... 16 6.2.12.2 Watershed managers ...... 17 6.3 IMPLEMENTATION ...... 18

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐i Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

LIST OF TABLES Table 6.1 Significant Contaminant Sources in the San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds

Table 6.2 Potential Contaminant Sources Not Significant in the Project Watersheds

Table 6.3 Recommendations

Table 6.4 Suggested Monitoring Parameters to Augment Current Programs

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐ii Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Conclusions

This subsection begins by discussing conclusions related to the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) and AWWA/DHS Guidance Manual, then presents specific conclusions related to contaminant sources, monitoring programs, and overall watershed management.

6.1.1 SWTR disinfection compliance requirements

The SWTR requires a minimum of 4 log (or 99.99 percent) virus and 3 log (99.9 percent) Giardia cyst removal/inactivation. DHS requires utilities that report monthly median total coliform concentrations greater than 1,000 MPN/100 ml to increase the minimum level of pathogen inactivation at their treatment plant. However, DHS does not require systems to monitor for raw water total coliform bacteria, which is needed to determine the monthly median concentration. The SCWD collects bi-monthly total coliform samples from the intakes of each water source and since 1996, has also monitored total coliform in the blended water entering the Graham Hill WTP. None of the other participating utilities routinely monitor total coliform concentrations entering their treatment plants. Therefore, at this time, it is impossible to document for these latter utilities the plant influent monthly median values. Preliminary conclusions, based on available monitoring results, are presented in the following paragraphs.

Participating utilities other than SCWD which have measured raw water total coliform have had very low to moderate concentrations. These generally have stream intake structures located upstream of human developed areas (e.g., SLVWD) or downstream from open space areas (e.g., Citizens Utilities). Therefore, it appears that these utilities need to remove and inactivate 4 log viruses and 3 log Giardia cysts as currently required. More total coliform data are needed to verify the log removal and inactivation requirements for each system.

The one raw water source of most concern is the SCWD San Lorenzo River intake at the Tait Street Diversion. Between 2001 and 2005, the highest annual median values of total coliform were measured at the Felton and Tait Street Diversions. These sources are not used after the first seasonal rains which significantly increase turbidity and coliform

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐1 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

counts. When used, these sources are usually blended with other raw water sources which contain significantly lower total coliform concentrations. Therefore, the SCWD does not need to increase the required level of disinfection at this time. However, the SCWD should continue to evaluate the need to modify the required level of disinfection, especially if ESA in-stream flow requirements result in source adjustments.

6.1.2 Significant contaminant sources

From the survey findings, the consulting team concludes that each of the sources listed in Tables 6-1 and 6-2 contributes some type of contaminant(s) to the drinking water sources. The major significant sources (Table 6-1) include septic system discharges, urban runoff, and confined animal facilities (e.g., horse stables) located beside the San Lorenzo River or another drainage. In addition, the presence of unauthorized activity, poorly maintained roads, timber harvests, selected chemical spills, wild pigs, quarry runoff, and inherent geologic hazards also contributes to contamination, primarily through increased sediment loading to the surface water sources. Distinguishing between significant and less-than-significant sources is often difficult, especially in Santa Cruz County, which is 100 percent reliant on local streams and aquifers for its water sources – a relatively rare situation in most of California. All contaminant sources that contribute sediment or indirectly increase bed sedimentation can profoundly influence the reliability and robustness of water supplies. For example, maintaining aquatic habitat requires less water in a channel free of excess sediment, so if sediment is allowed to accumulate in the channel, purveyors will have less water available for supply after meeting the minimum habitat conditions that community standards and regulatory requirements demand. Another burden in assigning contaminant significance is that some sources become significant only during years of extreme conditions or following episodic events. An additional threshold in establishing significance is the possibility that one or more sources may be permanently lost or lost long-term to any number of causes. Each of these three qualifiers of significance sheds a somewhat different light on Ben Franklin’s aphorism, “You don’t know the value of water until the well runs dry”. Within this context, a discussion of each contaminant source is provided in the following paragraphs.

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐2 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

6.1.2.1 Wastewater and urban runoff Conclusions

The San Lorenzo Valley has a large number of septic systems, on both sandy and non- sandy soils, which are a major source of nitrate to the river and its tributary streams. Wastewater treatment plant discharges, urban runoff, and horses, other domestic animals and pets also contribute to elevated nitrate levels. The County’s wastewater management program is successfully addressing problem septic systems, promoting system upgrades where feasible, and requiring alternative systems where appropriate. The Bear Creek Estates package plant, serving 54 homes, was upgraded in 2005. The package plant at Boulder Creek Golf and Country Club is being studied to address problems with the storage and distribution system that have prevented continued use of reclaimed wastewater for irrigation. Implementation of the San Lorenzo River Nitrate TMDL and the County’s Nitrate Management Plan should lead to further water quality improvements.

Previous studies have indicated that septic systems, wildlife, livestock and pets, and urban runoff are all significant sources of microbial contaminants in the San Lorenzo River. The County’s recent microbial source tracking study showed that, based on ribotyping, birds are the primary source of elevated levels of coliform bacteria in the San Lorenzo River. The San Lorenzo Valley does not have a system of curbs, gutters and storm drains to convey runoff to the River; thus, it is important to protect existing open space areas near stream banks to filter runoff, to focus public education on source control and prevent contamination of runoff, and to maintain the water treatment plants in optimal working condition. And when considering the contaminant reduction in the six stream miles in Henry Cowell Redwoods State Park between southern Felton and northern Santa Cruz, it may also be that the reaches of stream between the communities – so characteristic of the San Lorenzo Valley – are one reason why nitrate and bacterial loadings have remained at lower levels than many experts predicted in the past.

Utilities influenced

Utilities which obtain surface water from an urbanized watershed area are influenced by both septic system and urban runoff discharges to area streams. These include primarily the Santa Cruz Water Department, selected areas of the San Lorenzo Valley Water District, and the Lompico County Water District.

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐3 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

6.1.2.2 Confined animal facilities Conclusions

Horses, the main confined animals in both the North Coast and San Lorenzo River watersheds, are a major source of wet season nitrate and bacteria levels in surface waters, and a significant contributor to persistent turbidity as well. Nutrients and pathogens are mobilized from uncovered manure piles. Trails which cross stream channels degrade stream banks and facilitate direct contamination of surface waters. Similar effects are observed where paddocks adjoin waterways and horses traverse stream banks to reach the water. The County, the NRCS, the RCD, Ecology Action and various equestrian and watershed groups have developed programs to educate horse owners and assist them with design, installation and funding of measures to control pollution from horsekeeping. The County requires that manure management programs are developed for all new permittees and is also able to apply its riparian ordinance to provide the buffers and access management required to minimize nutrient, bacterial, and sediment loadings to surface waters. This is an area where substantial improvements have been realized since the original 1996 sanitary survey and the 2001 update, primarily through voluntary methods.

Utilities influenced

Utilities which draw surface water downstream from bankside stables or areas intensively used by horses can observe higher turbidity and coliform counts. These entities include the Santa Cruz Water Department, Cal-Am, and on occasion the Lompico County Water District.

6.1.2.3 Unauthorized activity Conclusions

Activities, such as non-permitted grading, cause significant sediment loading to streams. The cumulative impact of such activities in and near channels can significantly increase turbidity in neighboring streams. Changes to the City municipal code in 2004 facilitated code enforcement by authorizing rangers to take enforcement actions on City-managed lands. A planned conservation easement program is expected to expand the enforcement area to private lands between Tait and Sycamore Grove.

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐4 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

Utilities influenced

Utilities which use surface water collected from developed watershed areas are influenced by unauthorized activities. This includes the Santa Cruz Water Department, San Lorenzo Valley Water District and the Lompico County Water District, as well as smaller purveyors throughout the survey area.

6.1.2.4 Roads Conclusions

Clearing of landslide debris on roadways and poor maintenance of public and private roads increase erosion and sediment loading to local streams. This includes roads maintained by public landowners, as part of timber-management plans, by the County Public Works Department, and by Caltrans. Roads which require recurrent replacement due to failure of the underlying slopes disproportionately contribute to sedimentation, turbidity, and persistent turbidity.

Utilities influenced

All of the drinking water purveyors which rely on surface water supplies located downstream from any roadway are influenced by this source.

6.1.2.5 Wildlife Conclusions

The microbial source assessment study identified birds as the major contributor to elevated bacteria levels in the San Lorenzo River and tributary streams. Other wildlife was also found to be a significant source of bacteria. Wild or feral pigs are known to have inhabited areas near surface and spring water intake structures, burrowing in areas with gentle slopes and, thereby, increasing erosion. Pigs are especially active in upper Newell Creek.

Utilities influenced

Along with the SLVWD, all utilities with surface and/or spring water intakes in the upper watershed are potentially influenced by birds, pigs, and other wild animals in the area. SCWD must address contaminants originating with wildlife at each of its diversions. Utilities having intakes downstream of denuded or disturbed slopes inhabited by pigs may experience more frequent elevated turbidity and bacteria

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐5 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

episodes during storm events. Pigs are also symbolic in that they blur the distinction between wildlife and domestic animals.

6.1.2.6 Mining/quarry activities Conclusions

Quarries are occasionally a source of sediment during major storm events, reportedly caused by the failure of on-site settling/retention ponds to contain event stormwater runoff. In the San Lorenzo River watershed, sediment contributions from quarries have been progressively decreasing during recent decades as sediment-control measures are implemented and quarry activity diminishes. In the North Coast watersheds, Bonny Doon Quarry operations, specifically blasting, have caused and contributed to periodic turbidity signals at Liddell Spring which exceed the SCWD’s treatment capacity. When treatment capacity is exceeded, the Liddell Spring water source is lost for the duration that the signal exceeds treatment capacity. In addition, nitrate data collected at Liddell Spring since the early 1970’s suggests that background nitrate levels at the Spring have been steadily increasing. A possible source of at least some of the elevated nitrate levels could be from quarry blasting (ammonium nitrate) at Bonny Doon Quarry – however, this has not been confirmed.

Utilities influenced

The SCWD is periodically influenced by turbidity and nitrate increases in the Liddell Spring source. In the San Lorenzo River watershed, the SCWD is affected by sediment contributions from the one active sand quarry (Quail Hollow), one rock quarry (Felton) and from discontinued quarries (Olympia and Hanson).

6.1.2.7 Geologic hazards and fires

Conclusions

Landslides are the most frequently occurring geologic event affecting the drinking water supply, causing elevated turbidities following major storm events. Earthquakes and erosion from fire areas can severely increase sediment and natural organic matter loading to surface waters, both initially and during the process of ‘recovery’ from these episodic events. Finally, erosion following major fires, floods, landslides and possibly droughts or earthquakes can disrupt use of some or many surface water intakes for

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐6 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

periods ranging from several months to several years, or deliver a pulse of sediment to the channel which may take years to dissipate.

Utilities influenced

All utilities which use surface water can be influenced by geologic hazards and fires in these watersheds.

6.1.2.8 Chemical spills Conclusions

Three ground-water chemical plumes in Felton have been reasonably contained by contemporary standards. Supplemental remedial activity is imminent at the former Chevron and Exxon stations, and may take place at Valeteria as well. The potential remains for chemical spills on highways, on major County roads such as Empire or Smith Grades, or on the short segment of railroad between Olympia and Santa Cruz, if it was reactivated.

Utilities influenced

All utilities which obtain surface water from developed watershed areas are potentially influenced by spills on local roadways. Currently, the Santa Cruz Water Department is the only utility which has detected any solvent-type chemicals in the water. One chemical, PCE has been detected at levels 5 to 10 times below the regulated limit at the Felton Diversion, and not at any intake used to supply water directly to the treatment plant.

6.1.3 Potential contaminant sources not significant

Table 6-2 lists the potential contaminant sources which are not deemed to be significant contributors affecting public health at this time. The table lists the supporting information and exceptions when noted. Given the particular Santa Cruz County environment, most of these sources could become significant at times, conditions, or with events discussed above (Section 6.1). Conclusions for these potential contaminant sources are discussed in the following paragraphs.

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐7 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

6.1.3.1 Agricultural land use

Overall, agricultural acreage remains very small in both total acreage and individual operations; effects on water supply remains limited. Vineyards potentially pose more a more serious challenge than Christmas tree plantations or organic vegetable farms, due to tillage disruption of steep slopes and use of chemicals for pest control.

6.1.3.2 Grazing animals and livestock

Grazing is not widespread in the subject watersheds. Most of the existing grazing occurs away from local streams.

6.1.3.3 Pesticides and herbicides

Limited chemical usage supports a conclusion that chemical usage is not a significant issue in these watersheds with respect to drinking water quality. Data appear to be limited to a few spot samples, with no indication of actionable levels.

6.1.3.4 Solid or hazardous waste facilities

The one closed landfill in the San Lorenzo River watershed (the Ben Lomond Landfill) does not appear to be contaminating the nearest stream, Newell Creek. Overall, illegal dumping is not a significant contaminant source in any of the watersheds, with respect to drinking water quality.

6.1.3.5 Recreational uses

The County fecal coliform data indicates that swimming may not appreciably impact the microbiological water quality of the streams. The most potentially significant recreational activities are horseback riding, trail maintenance and use of off-road vehicle of various types and sizes, all of which constitute locally significant sources of sediment. To the extent that these trails and uses are routed away from stream channels, or are at least separated from them by setbacks or open space areas, sediment and microbial contributions to the adjoining streams will be reduced.

6.1.3.6 NPDES Point Sources

Only small wastewater facilities exist in the San Lorenzo watershed. These include the 1970s-vintage package treatment plants at Bear Creek Estates and at the Boulder Creek Golf and Country Club, and the new facility at the San Lorenzo Valley schools in Felton.

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐8 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

These facilities are currently located and operated in a manner to minimize downstream water quality impacts. Furthermore, the Country Club is investigating the feasibility of reclaiming treated wastewater to a quality suitable for on-site irrigation.

6.1.4 Water quality monitoring programs

The drinking water purveyors participating in this study conduct the required monitoring for raw surface water quality. Results are submitted to regulatory agencies, and in many cases will be available to the public through various purveyor and County web sites. Bacterial data, collected weekly, are routinely tabulated with some analysis now conducted by staff. Improved and standardized reporting and dissemination of results is needed, and will help to make the data more useful to interested parties and the public at large.

6.1.5 Watershed management practices

Established policies, ordinances, and regulations in the County's General Plan are available to improve surface water quality. New management practices continue to be explored and implemented by the County's Health Services Agency and Planning Departments (c.f., Santa Cruz County, 2001; Swanson, 2002). As noted in the 2001 sanitary survey update, the City has engaged in watershed management activities with a formal emphasis on source protection since 1997, and has developed a sustained staff with 3 full-time positions and support from other City staff. The City completed a comprehensive watershed management plan in 2002. As a result, commercial logging is no longer practiced on City watershed lands. SLVWD is currently updating its watershed plan and has had a no-commercial logging policy in place since 1985.

County efforts have led to numerous structural improvements and involvement with citizen groups to educate the general public, most notably during a County-wide effort to develop watershed assessment and enhancement plans for selected watersheds, including the San Lorenzo Valley. County staff are leading efforts to implement structural improvements and increase public involvement. Multiple staff commitments, however, tend to interfere with watershed management program progress. Therefore, it seems prudent to dedicate County staff to a watershed management program or to augment program activities with water purveyor staff. The County has recently added funding for an additional half-time watershed and enforcement position. .

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐9 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

6.1.6 Emergency plans

All water purveyors now have vulnerability assessments, and have or are updating emergency plans linked to 911 and emergency services agencies. Continued maintenance and updating of these plans by the purveyors is needed. Improved maps are available to emergency crews through the County’s GIS services, and via web-based mapping and aerial photography available through commercial websites at all times.

6.2 Recommendations

Table 6-3 summarizes the key recommendations from this study.

6.2.1 Wastewater discharges

To minimize the impacts from wastewater treatment discharges, primarily septic systems, recommended actions include:

ƒ Purveyors should continue to collect, tabulate and review the water quality data on a frequent basis (e.g., annually) to evaluate the effectiveness of ongoing management programs. Smaller systems should adopt or develop systems to tabulate and report their monitoring data electronically, setting the stage for future web-based distribution of data.

ƒ If necessary, additional County inspection staff should be added to continue implementation of the Wastewater Management Plan. Records of inspections and upgrades should be kept in both tabular and in map form, preferably on the County’s GIS system to allow focus on problem areas.

ƒ The drinking water purveyors should inform County Environmental Health when elevated coliform or nitrate levels are detected in raw water sources.

ƒ Water purveyors should review development plans for sites upstream of their raw water intakes to verify that measures are in place that will address key issues such as septic system discharges and urban runoff. Specifically, SCWD (and secondarily, SLVWD) should work with County Environmental Health to review plans for proposed developments upstream of their intakes, such as the Tait Street Diversion, to verify that acceptable control measures planned and that mitigation measures have been appropriately implemented and maintained.

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐10 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

6.2.2 Urban runoff

Possible management practices to control water quality impacts from urban runoff include:

ƒ The County should increase implementation of the Phase 2 NPDES Municipal Stormwater permit program while awaiting SWMP adoption by the Regional Board.

ƒ Establish and implement an aggressive public education/involvement program to minimize contaminant loading from stormwater runoff. All of the purveyors and the County should focus efforts to inform customers and watershed residents of the ongoing water quality and supply issues. Many residents are not aware or do not appreciate the dual nature of the San Lorenzo Valley – a rural residential area, locally approaching urban densities, and the central water-supply source for the region.

ƒ Maximize and protect riparian setbacks from drainageways and streams.

ƒ Continue to develop awareness, practices, and management measures directed at the unique properties of sandy soils and watersheds, which call for a common set of measures to minimize nutrient loads, maintain aquifer recharge and the resulting baseflow, minimize erosion and channel incision, and protect springs/seeps/wetlands and riparian-zone resilience during dry months and dry years.

6.2.3 Confined animal facilities

If the voluntary measures currently in place are shown to be ineffective, the County should develop an animal control ordinance for the subject watersheds, focused primarily on horse stables. Over the next five years, the County should explore methods to monitor the effectiveness of voluntary measures. These may include tracking of complaints and permit violations and/or microbial source tracking. If development of an ordinance is deemed necessary, assistance from stable owners should be sought, and it should provide for implementation of simple and effective control measures coordinated through user groups and/or non-regulatory entities. Water quality should be monitored pre- and post-installation of selected practices to assess their effectiveness. Horse stable runoff control practices should be implemented regularly, but particularly emphasized during the fall months in order to minimize contaminant loading during the next rainy season.

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐11 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

6.2.4 Unauthorized activities

As discussed in this report, unauthorized activities are considered a chronic and ongoing source of contamination. The County has many open cases where ordinances have been violated, many of which occurred in riparian corridors. Seeking compliance and providing education and enforcement should be prioritized, with water-quality protection in mind. Increased patrols and improved collaboration with DFG should be sought.

6.2.5 Quarries and mines

Utilities, such as the SCWD and Forest Lakes MWC, should continue to review water quality and quantity data monitored by the quarry operators. Measures should be developed to shorten the interval between when quarry staff identify a likely exceedance and when the information is transmitted through the County to purveyors. Informal exchanges promoting quicker data transfer should also be encouraged.

Quarry operators and downstream water users should also:

ƒ Develop trends of water quality data collected. This will help to identify effectiveness of implemented BMPs or any failure of on-site treatment practices, as well as promote meaningful input from purveyors into appropriate modifications of conditions during the 5-year permit-renewal process through the County.

ƒ Establish specific water quality objectives for springs and streams located downstream of quarries and request additional water quality data, if and where necessary.

ƒ Inspect quarries routinely, including visits in the fall period to verify the capacity and condition of on-site settling/retention ponds and erosion control structures, and that these are prepared for heavy rainfalls.

6.2.6 Roadway maintenance

Caltrans and the County Public Works Department have taken significant measures to improve roadway debris control and general maintenance. This includes developing suitable practices to stabilize and dispose of landslide material and to control runoff from stockpiled material. The water purveyors and the County should identify areas suited to establish additional road maintenance service sites, and mechanisms to quickly Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐12 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

move stockpiled material to long-term storage areas, such as has been implemented at the Cabrillo Quarry in Aptos.

The RCD and the NRCS have developed a rural private roads evaluation and maintenance training program which has acquired a statewide reputation over the past 10 years, and appropriate measures are gradually being implemented on both private and public roads. The County has also secured grants to evaluate improved roadside maintenance practices in riparian areas (herbicide reduction/elimination) and to prepare a new manual for road maintenance practices (erosion and sedimentation reduction). An inventory of potential sediment sources along county roads in the San Lorenzo Watershed has been completed and priority projects are being designed, permitted and implemented through the Integrated Watershed Restoration Program (IWRP) with funds from the Coastal Conservancy, State water bonds and other sources.

Roads do, however, remain a major source of turbidity, and road systems periodically contribute large volumes of sediment when culverts are blocked or when concentrated runoff from roads cause incision: (a) into slopes between the road and the stream network, and (b) within the channels, by concentrating runoff and magnifying peak flows in streams. Ongoing measures to be sought include motivating and/or requiring operators to: (a) continue and augment the new measures and procedures recently adopted by CalTrans and Public Works; (b) apply the rural road program to private residential and timber-harvest roads within the County; and (c) adopt new measures controlling the downstream incision and bank erosion described above, as well as pesticide and herbicide use measures.

6.2.7 Timber harvests

The recommendations stated above for roadway maintenance should also be applied to roads allowing access for timber harvests by CDF, owners, and other participants in THP review. Other recommendations are:

ƒ For major portions of road networks, owners should require properly abandoned roads after logging activities are completed. This includes blocking access to the area and restoring road cuts to the original slopes, especially in areas where road densities exceed 3.0 miles per square mile (as recommended by NOAA Fisheries) within portions of a particular watershed within the THP ownership and adjacent to it .

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐13 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

ƒ Purveyors and the County should work with CDF to aggressively enforce existing requirements to minimize area damage and maintain roadways, especially in segments close to streams.

ƒ The SCWD and other water purveyors should lobby for inclusion in the THP review team, rather than be limited to an advisory role.

ƒ Purveyors should work with the County GIS department to complete a road density analysis for key water-supply watersheds, using NOAA fisheries threshold of 3 mi./sq. mi. as an indicator of ecosystem health.

6.2.8 Fire

Most purveyors drawing upon surface or spring supplies should anticipate extended turbidity events following a large fire in their watersheds. Planning should focus on alternative sources of supply during the months or years following the fire, and for protecting diversion or distribution facilities from post-fire erosion and slope instability.

6.2.9 Water-quality monitoring

The raw water-quality data programs should be augmented where sources are vulnerable to contamination. Augmentation should intrinsically include electronic recordation and dissemination of data.

Table 6-4 lists a recommended monitoring program for larger, medium, and smaller utilities in the watersheds. Primarily, utilities should start to routinely monitor for total coliforms in source waters. This is especially important for utilities which use surface water which drains from developed watershed areas.

Also, water purveyors should consider the following improvements to their monitoring programs:

ƒ Develop a web-based interagency monitoring and database system to supplement the existing valley-wide database maintained by the County, which has somewhat different purposes and an incomparable long-term record.

ƒ Evaluate the data regularly to identify any adverse or improving trends and the underlying cause(s) of significant changes.

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐14 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

ƒ Store the data in computerized systems to facilitate easier transmittal of the data to other agencies or to generate graphical water quality trends. The data can then be electronically transferred to a lead agency/utility for routine evaluations.

ƒ Augment current utility water quality databases with data collected by quarry operators or other projects responsible for water-quality monitoring in surface or ground waters in either watershed.

ƒ Purveyors and the County should seek an assessment of water-quality trends following episodic events, such as large wildfires, earthquakes, and major storms such as occurred in 1982 or 1998, such that trends may be anticipated, contingency plans developed, and any needed interties or backup facilities identified. Western Santa Cruz County appears to have an unusual number and range of such events, and the experience from such events in and near the County could be readily distilled such that responses to these types of events can be readily planned and implemented.

ƒ Prepare for the next watershed sanitary survey update in 5 years by carefully noting and recording concerns or problem areas, and implementing control measures applicable to specific watershed conditions.

6.2.10 Emergency plans

The water purveyors should continue efforts to implement the comprehensive inter- agency notification procedure and to coordinate their respective notification plans with the County’s Hazardous Materials Section. Also, emergency plans and documents should be updated as frequently as general operations plans. DHS should review the operations and emergency plans during annual system inspections.

6.2.11 Small system treatment systems

The small systems and the County do not have the resources to operate and review the facilities in the same detail as the large systems. Therefore, it is recommended that County staff coordinate with DHS or the California Rural Water Association (CRWA) to conduct annual inspections of the filtration/treatment systems. The CRWA frequently assists small utilities with treatment problems, staff training, etc. Additional support might be provided in standardizing the protocols for conducting and reporting monitoring.

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐15 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

Specifically, the County should:

ƒ Develop a disinfection concept for small systems to confirm compliance with the SWTR, specifically per the contact time (Ct) requirements described in Section 5.

ƒ Verify that the existing “packaged” filtration processes are considered equivalent to accepted treatment techniques.

ƒ Confirm that water treatment reliability concepts are in-place (e.g., redundant chemical feed systems, emergency power).

6.2.12 Watershed management practices 6.2.12.1 Water utilities

Most of the ongoing watershed management efforts are coordinated by County staff as part of the wastewater management program, regional erosion-control efforts, and programs to promote salmonid recovery. Therefore, the drinking water utilities may wish to continue to be increasingly active in current watershed management programs, in part to meet the specific objectives for drinkable waters. Some example programs to consider are:

ƒ Public Education/Relations — A joint public education program may be effective at minimizing soil disruption, improving erosion control practices, and reducing urban runoff contamination. Purveyors can increase programs to mail educational pamphlets or develop informational websites.

ƒ Increase Watershed Surveillance — Staff should report activities within the watershed which can impact water quality. For example, utilities can establish and publicize a watershed "hotline" telephone number to report illegal, unauthorized, or detrimental activities.

ƒ Political Support —Water utilities should lobby the County Board of Supervisors to increase enforcement of existing ordinances and to provide more resources to overall watershed control/management activities.

ƒ Special Sandy Soil Provisions – An integrated program meshing use of BMPs and other measures designed to minimize the erosion, sedimentation, nutrient and pathogen issues of Zayante and other sandy soils, plus protect the ground water, wetlands, and valuable stream habitats that they support should be developed and implemented. It will mean more recharge of Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐16 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

aquifers with lower level of contaminants, less sand in streams, more water in wetlands and channels, and less maintenance of public facilities, in addition to cleaner water.

ƒ Lobby Board of Supervisors to assign County GIS department to complete a road density analysis for key water-supply watersheds as an indicator of ecosystem health.

Regarding the San Lorenzo Valley Watershed Management Plan Update—County Environmental Health is nearing completion of the update to the 1979 Watershed Management Plan. Water utilities should emphasize to their staff and customers the benefits likely to accrue to drinking water quality from successfully achieving the programs goals. They should also continue their participation in the program and to help shape subsequent updates.

6.2.12.2 Watershed managers

Other issues the County and water utilities should consider when developing watershed management programs include:

ƒ Continue to investigate and implement feasible management practices. Descriptions of alternative practices are available from numerous sources, especially from such agencies as the American Water Works Association (AWWA) and Water Environment Federation (WEF). Both of these agencies have recently sponsored research projects and conferences to assist communities improve watershed management and protection.

ƒ Publicize the programs and materials available from the Resource Conservation District and other County agencies which describe specific practices to control erosion from hillsides and roadways, stabilize slopes, construct silt fences construct spring boxes, and to site, construct and maintain septic or advanced on-site waste-disposal systems:

ƒ Investigate methods to integrate watershed management projects with other benefits. Some of the projects to enhance watershed management may be able to obtain Federal and State funding if other benefits (e.g., fishery improvements and groundwater storage) are integrated into the existing watershed management program. Several watershed management projects are funded using this approach.

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐17 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Section 6 Sanitary Survey Conclusions and Recommendations

ƒ Meet with other agencies and utilities to discuss watershed management funding needs for specific programs. This includes establishing guidelines to propose projects to councils, boards, etc., and to request support from non- conventional sources for pilot programs, etc.

ƒ Development of a holistic approach to manage areas with sandy soils with measures which (a) limit erosion, (b) reduce sedimentation of streams and drainage improvements, (c) maintain needed recharge to the sandy aquifers, critical to the region’s drought-year water supply, (d) sustain sufficient recharge to protect water quality and control nitrate accumulation in the aquifers, and (e) allow springs and wetlands supported by these aquifers to maintain their functions and values.

6.3 Implementation

To implement the recommended actions, reallocation of, or possibly additions to, existing staff may be required. For example, it appears that the SCWD may need additional watershed analysts. Also, additional County staff may be needed to inspect roadways, quarries, and septic systems, and coordinate management activities, and (for the San Lorenzo Valley) to implement the measures proposed in the forthcoming watershed management plan. Therefore, the drinking water utilities and County should discuss the watershed issues and develop an implementation plan, including the need for additional staffing, for the selected management practices.

Section 6 03-20-07.doc 6‐18 Table 6-1 Significant Contaminant Sources in the San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds

Contaminant San Lorenzo North Coast Supporting Information Comments Source Valley Septic System √ Elevated nitrate in streams, County has established a Discharges downstream of more densely comprehensive management plan (Wastewater) populated areas to reduce nitrate and improve problematic septic systems.

Elevated coliform counts Very high coliform counts can be downstream of urban areas. indicative of poorly operated septic systems; excessive percolation rates is a more common issue associated with sandy soils in both the San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast areas.

Urban Runoff √ Elevated coliform bacteria Baseline fecal coliform bacteria downstream of urban areas. mostly attributed to non-human Reduced coliform through open sources. space areas. Concentrated √√On the order of 6% of nitrate The Santa Cruz RCD and Ecology Animal Facilities originated from these facilities in Action have an ongoing program mid-1990s; value probably designed to emplace best- decreasing despite greater horse management practices, re-use of population manure, and its composting.

Unauthorized √√Anecdotal reports of “weekend” Unpermitted grading and road Activity grading of roads and pads crossing construction in streams, increases sediment loading to the trespassing with mountain bikes, surface water streams. are observed activities in the key watershed areas.

Poorly Maintained √√Many poorly constructed or Small logging areas have Roads (Logging maintained roads were reported by experienced significant erosion Areas, Rural Balance, water district, and agency after site is abandoned. Residence Access, staff; see also and noted during etc.) the field survey; also documented from Zayante Creeks erosion report. County staff report of improper Increasing year-round use of disposal of landslide debris. seasonal access roads inducing erosion. Wildlife √√Wild pigs inhabit and disturb areas Fish and Game has allowed some around some intake structures and restricted hunting and trapping of have increased erosion. wild pigs in other watersheds to protect the water supplies. Other wild animal populations do not appear to significantly impact water quality.

Potential Avian sources of coliform documented in RNA and other regional studies

206081 Table 6-1 03-26-07.xls; Sheet1 Page 1 of 2 Table 6-1 Significant Contaminant Sources in the San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds

Contaminant San Lorenzo North Coast Supporting Information Comments Source Valley Mines/Quarries √√San Lorenzo Valley: Intermittently San Lorenzo Valley: Periodic heavy sediment in runoff originates discharges of washwater and from quarry sites. quarry fines enters stream system; regulatory response increasingly prompt and stringent

North Coast: SCWD has North Coast: Turbidity and nitrate experienced elevated nitrate and may be accelerated by Bonny turbidity in Liddell Spring. Doon Quarry operations (i.e., blasting). Timber Harvests √√Repeated erosion, incision, and See also Appendix C; repair of failures of portions of roads used entire road networks is warranted, primarily for timber harvests can including re-bedding of some be seen, especially in the Kings, segments. Closely linked to poorly Newell and Hare Creek basins, but maintained roads. also elsewhere.

Geologic Hazards √√Elevated sediment loading and The area experiences numerous and Fires raw water turbidity during the landslides, especially during the winter (i.e., rainy) months, winter months and during wet frequently caused by landslides. years. Area is susceptible to Persistent turbidity may be large fires, especially during dry experienced for several months to years; no local experience with several years following a major large fires for about 50 years. watershed-scale fire or large landslide, or following major slumping of roads (tends to be recurrent where re-built at or near same places. .

Chemical Spills √√Two plumes in Felton have seeped The potential exists for significant into the San Lorenzo River. Trace chemical spills caused by traffic amounts of chemicals have been accidents, etc. detected. Potential Potential

206081 Table 6-1 03-26-07.xls; Sheet1 Page 2 of 2 Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

Table 6-2 Potential Contaminant Sources Not Significant in the Project Watersheds

Potential Supporting Information Exceptions General Conclusion Contaminant Source Agricultural Land Use Less than one tenth of one percent of area Some small facilities or private-home vineyards need Vineyards are generally not located near streams. of the watersheds is cultivated – to improve their erosion control practices, particularly Sediment contributions from these areas are usually on steeper slopes. attenuated before it reaches streams and intakes.

Pesticides and Herbicides Chemicals are limited to household and Roadside use of herbicides is continuing Pesticides and herbicides are not detected in the minor roadway weed control; sharp drinking water sources. Monitoring of these decrease in public agency use. constituents should be initiated. Fire supressant chemicals merit an evaluation prior to the need for their use Solid/Hazardous Waste The Ben Lomond municipal landfill closed Any remaining plume is not deemed a threat to water Down-gradient monitoring indicates no contamination Facilities in 1987. No known hazardous waste supply. County has needed to remove naturally- of surface waters. facilities exist in the watershed. occurring cadmium which leaches from shales near the closed landfill. Leaking Underground Supplemental remedial measures All 3 sites report substantial residuals Currently, low levels are reported Tanks underway at 2 or possibly all 3 sites Recreational Uses County monitoring of swimming areas Hiking and horse trails sometimes cross stream beds. At the time of the 1996 survey, minimal measures found marginal increases of contamination. Isolated swimming hole areas exist in area streams. were in place to control contamination from horses and from trails. Control measures have spread quickly throughout the two watersheds, both on public and private lands...

Ground-water Discharge No problematic discharges from By their nature, streams draining sandy watersheds As is elevated erosion, the higher summer nutrient groundwater sources were found. (such as Bean and Zayante Creeks) have higher loadings and diminished baseflows are part of a baseflows with greater summer nutrient content and broader set of sandy watershed issues which will bacterial loads than other streams. Exceedances are benefit from an integrated solution. not reported. Managers should recognize that these sources will continue to support similarly elevated but, concentrations below action levels, and manage accordingly.

Seawater Intrusion Seawater does not approach the drinking Elevated TDS/salts originate from some natural Seawater intrusion is not reported from any part of water intakes. geologic formations, unrelated to induced intrusion. these topogramphic watersheds, let alone areas upstream of the diversions, NPDES Point Sources The Regional Board does not regulate any None. Point source discharges regulated by the Regional NPDES-type discharges in the watersheds. Board do not exist in the watershed areas.

206081 Table 6-2 03-0907.xls; Sheet1 Table 6-3 Recommendations

Category Recommendations 1996 2000 Status Recommendations 2000 Responsible Agency Notes 2006 Status Recommendations 2006 Responsible Agency Notes

Wastewater Share water quality data, County data are ▪Increasing posting of data on- County, RWQCB, Water ▪County in process of ▪Continue to publish monitoring County, RWQCB, Water Discharges especially when elevated currently online. City line will facilitate increased Purveyors, DHS converting to new data to internet. ▪Increase Purveyors, DHS coliform bacteria counts are currently building communication between system. ▪River accessibility and usability of data. detected, among water purveyors internet data sharing agencies. ▪All monitoring monitoring data posted ▪Small water purveyors should and the County Health Services capability Agencies should develop weekly to County develop electronic databases with Agency electronic databases. ▪Agencies website. ▪Recent beach exchange capabilities. should strive to put data on-line bacteria data plots in a timely fashion and on a available online. regularly scheduled basis.

Inspect problematic septic Ongoing. Continue. County, RWQCB ▪Active management of ▪Inspect problematic septic County, RWQCB, systems on a routine basis. septic systems is systems on a routine basis and SLVWD ongoing. ▪The Bear implement upgrades as reported Creek Estates system ▪Inspect and report results re serving 54 homes in the advanced onsite systems SLVWD was inspected ▪Upgrade Boulder Creek Country in 2002 and upgraded in Club line to prevent spills. 2005. Water Purveyors should Water Purveyors Partnerships with land trusts ▪SLVWD acquired 188 ▪Continue ▪Emphasize acquisition Water Purveyors SWRCB grants may investigate opportunities for and alternative funding acres (with conservation of watershed lands or abet acquisitions watershed property acquisition/ sources may enable this. easement) in Malosky conservation easements which conservation easements. Creek watershed from will protect drinking water Sempervirens Fund. sources or aquatic habitat. ▪Sempervirens also purchased 425 acres in Lompico headwaters from timber company. ▪Wastewater treatment wetlands were constructed at San Lorenzo High School.

206081 Table 6-3 03-20-07.xls; Sheet1 1 of 10 Table 6-3 Recommendations

Category Recommendations 1996 2000 Status Recommendations 2000 Responsible Agency Notes 2006 Status Recommendations 2006 Responsible Agency Notes

Urban Runoff Establish and implement an Currently being ▪Programs such as those County, City of Scotts Investigate possibility of ▪Joint City-County ▪Increase County implementation County, RWQCB, ▪Investigate possibility aggressive public education initiated by County. implemented by Pacific Grove, Valley, RWQCB, Water using Prop. 13 funds for San NPDES Phase II Storm of NPDES Phase II program SWRCB (sandy soils) of using Prop. 50 program to minimize contaminant Monterey, Capitola and other Purveyors Lorenzo watershed pilot Water Management while awaiting RWQCB funding for content in stormwater runoff. local municipalities may help projects and outreach. Program (SWMP) adoption. ▪In sandy soils, the implementation of BMP define the scale of this problem awaiting adoption by disproportionate increases in projects described in and provide direction for projects RWQCB (expected mid- volume of urban runoff mean that SWMP. ▪ Integrated in the San Lorenzo Valley. 2007). ▪City routinely the runoff itself causes erosion Regional Water ▪Develop pilot projects for select requires BMPs (typically and related contamination; raise Management Plan neighborhoods such as Paradise volume retention) for awareness of this issue; develop program may address Park. ▪Encourage implementation new development sandy soil BMP guidelines, stormwater and maintenance of bmps through projects. ▪City has perhaps in a broader holistic contamination if the environmental review Model Urban Runoff context including recharge IRWMP process. Program (but < 50 homes enhancement, sedimentation implementation phase is upstream of intake). control, water quality protection funded. (esp. nitrates and contaminants), and wetland and spring maintenance.

Confined Implement Voluntary Program Currently being Continue. County, RCD, RWQCB ▪Many parcels in riparian ▪RCD/Ecology Action ▪Continue.▪ Require monitoring County, RCD, RWQCB; An area of major Animal for Livestock Operations. initiated by County. zones. ▪Increased equestrian used Prop. 40 funding to of permits. ▪Lobby for more site user groups ongoing activity and Facilities use of North Coast implement several specific (soil type, proximity to improvement; continued Watersheds. ▪Water demonstration projects. water courses, etc.) and density activity and refinement Purveyors should advocate ▪Manure Management rules for equestrian facilities. needed to inhibit future for stronger protection Plans are required for ▪Develop a County Equestrian regulation given the measures on the North Coast permits if Management Plan that would number of horses. in the current General Plan applicable.▪Some former include recommendations to update process. problem sites have been require monitoring at large fully addressed, others stables. ▪Explore methods to improved. ▪The County monitor effectiveness of has promoted voluntary voluntary measures. measures.

Water Purveyors should Water Purveyors Partnerships with land trusts ▪SLVWD acquired 188 Continue. Water Purveyors investigate opportunities for and alternative funding acres in Miloskey Creek watershed property acquisition / sources may enable this. watershed from conservation easements. Sempervirens. ▪Sempervirens purchased 425 acres of Lompico headwaters from timber company.

206081 Table 6-3 03-20-07.xls; Sheet1 2 of 10 Table 6-3 Recommendations

Category Recommendations 1996 2000 Status Recommendations 2000 Responsible Agency Notes 2006 Status Recommendations 2006 Responsible Agency Notes

Unauthorized Implement a more rigorous SCWD currently ▪Continue. ▪Water Purveyors Water Purveyors, Santa ▪Historically, enforcement ▪Educational flyers were ▪Continue. ▪Enhance Water Purveyors, Santa ▪Investigate possibility Activities enforcement program of existing working with County should conduct outreach to Cruz Sheriff, County Code has not been politically sent to homeowners in collaboration with DFG on water Cruz Sheriff, County of buying a riverfront (Regulatory (riparian corridor, grading, Planning Code violators coordinating with Compliance, DFG, popular and there has not watershed. ▪City has quality violations. Code Compliance, DFG, conservation easement and Planning erosion control, Forest Practice Compliance staff, DFG regulatory officials when RWQCB, County District been adequate existing cleaned up camps and RWQCB, County District to allow City to move Code Rules, etc.) regulations to and resolution of other necessary. ▪SCWD Recreation Attorney regulations. ▪Development of increased security patrols Attorney campers without violations, as minimize water quality impacts regulatory agencies to staff and representatives of other Wilder Ranch by CA DPR near the Tait intakes. sheriffs involvement. well as runoff. facilitate resolution of large land owners and Water around SCWD Intakes ▪ATVs have been ▪Evaluate water quality trespass, etc.) these violations. purveyors (i.e. SLVWD, Big necessitate increased patrols, purchased and training is monitoring data to Basin Water Company, etc.) and exclusion fencing around conducted every fall. identify bacteria should conduct watershed patrols intakes. ▪City Municipal code sources. as possible. ▪Secondarily, was changed in 2004 to necessary equipment for patrol authorize law must be available (i.e. ATVs, enforcement role of etc.). ▪Status of SCWD rangers. Recreation staff and ability to enforce regulations on City property should also be strengthened.

▪Lobby County to develop DPR, CDF, City o f Scotts County has added one Continue County; with assistance Planning Code. ▪Compliance Valley half-time staff person from DPR, CDF, City o f positions that are solely focused devoted to natural Scotts Valley, City of on natural resource issues. resource code Santa Cruz on its compliance (e.g. erosion, watershed properties riparian problems). Now 1.5 staff

▪Code Compliance staff should Continue County receive relevant natural resource related training on a regular basis. ▪Fence intakes where possible. Felton Diversion and Tait Continue All purveyors Funding or unfunded intake fences have been mandates likely re strengthened, security water-supply security has been increased, closed-circuit television monitoring is planned.

Continue ▪Lobby County to provide better service in response to requests for Sheriff's assistance.

206081 Table 6-3 03-20-07.xls; Sheet1 3 of 10 Table 6-3 Recommendations

Category Recommendations 1996 2000 Status Recommendations 2000 Responsible Agency Notes 2006 Status Recommendations 2006 Responsible Agency Notes

Unauthorized Illegal dumping and ▪Increase patrols for illegal County Activities vehicle abandonment a dumping in outer watershed (cont.) recurrent problem areas. ▪Continue funding Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program; consider a fines program where last registered owner contributes to funding further abandoned vehicle abatement. . Quarries & Review periodic staff and EIR Currently conducted by Continue. RWQCB, Water Currently conducted by ▪Continue. ▪Negotiate mitigation RWQCB, Water Conflicts between Mines reports thoroughly and respond to SLVWD and SCWD. Purveyors, County, DFG, SLVWD and SCWD. for turbidity impacts from Bonny Purveyors, County, DFG, mining and watershed issues which impact water quality DWR, etc. Doon Quarry. DWR, etc. uses are gradually to specific sources. increasing

Request more frequent water Currently conducted by Continue. RWQCB Water , Currently conducted by Continue with more frequent RWQCB Water , May be linked to 5-year quality monitoring be conducted SLVWD and SCWD. Purveyors, County SLVWD and SCWD. monitoring Purveyors, County permit review by the quarry operators, ▪Monitoring has been specifically during potential improved. problematic periods (e.g., first- flush rains, earthquakes).

Roadways Review and modify debris Presently occurring. ▪Continue. ▪Augment Emergency County, Cal-Trans, DFG, Much of this work will be Standards for emergency ▪Continue ▪Implement a program County, Cal-Trans, DFG, Prop. 40 funding to management practices to avoid Road Repair Funds. RWQCB. accomplished through the road repair funds have to map recurrent road failures due RWQCB; County. study vegetation disposal of material into streams. “Fish-Net 4C Program” in not been augmented. to geologic instability (public, management BMPs response to requirements of private, logging roads) if > 100 the Endangered Species Act. cu yds

Develop additional road service CRCD 319 Grant ▪Develop road or community RCD, County, Water San Lorenzo Caretakers are ▪County Road Continue RCD, County, Water areas or educate landowners to recently completed. S service areas. ▪Continue to Purveyors, RWQCB successful at educational Maintenance Manual Purveyors, RWQCB provide acceptable maintenance, provide educational material to events, but lack of was developed. ▪RCD construction, etc. of frequently landowners. ▪Provide cost participation by stakeholders private road program used unpaved, rural roads. sharing for private road is a weakness. Prop 13 funds and cost share for roads improvement. may provide impetus for program (FishNet4C) continuation of this work. ▪San Lorenzo Caretakers group disbanded

Verify that proper drainage Presently occurring. ▪Continue. ▪Verify that proper Water Purveyors, County, Much of this work will be ▪A County Road Continue Water Purveyors, County, structures (e.g., culverts) are used best management practices are Cal-Trans, RWQCB, DFG, accomplished through the Maintenance Manual Cal-Trans, RWQCB, to stabilize cuts and control employed in road building and DMG, CDF – Resource “Fish-Net 4C Program” in was developed. ▪Funding DFG, DMG, CDF – erosion. maintenance. Management Division response to requirements of is available for culvert Resource Management the Endangered Species Act. upgrades Division

206081 Table 6-3 03-20-07.xls; Sheet1 4 of 10 Table 6-3 Recommendations

Category Recommendations 1996 2000 Status Recommendations 2000 Responsible Agency Notes 2006 Status Recommendations 2006 Responsible Agency Notes

Timber Enforce temporary roadway SLVWD and SCWD ▪Continue. ▪Purveyors should CDF-Resource Enforcement level difficult to Continue CDF-Resource Harvests maintenance ordinances. have a history of lobby agencies for greater Management Division determine due to remote Management Division advocating this. enforcement presence. County, RWQCB, DFG, nature of primarily private County, RWQCB, DFG, Water Purveyors. parcels. Water Purveyors.

Lobby State Board of Forestry ▪SLVWD and SCWD ▪Extend monitoring and County, Water Purveyors, ▪Recent pre-harvest ▪NTMPs allow repeated ▪Continue. ▪Lobby for water County, Water Purveyors, and Board of Supervisors to currently engaged in maintenance period for Timber CDF -Resource inspections on some parcels harvests without public purveyor inclusion in review teamCDF -Resource establish more stringent this activity. ▪Protection Harvests to 5 years. ▪Stabilize Management, Division, reveal that ongoing comment. ▪RWQCB - rather than advisory role. Management, Division, maintenance requirements in Ordinance No. 4529 point sources (e.g. landslides), DFG RWQCB maintenance of roads is becoming more involved ▪Advocate for use of actual DFG RWQCB County ordinances and State enacted in 1999, inner gorge roads, through critical and often lacking. with pre-harvest watershed in THP rather than the THP regulations for activities however it was recently engineering, seeding/mulching of ▪See recommendation of the inspection (PHI). ▪CDF larger "planning" watershed close to watershed streams. stricken down by the roadbeds, etc. State of California – Forest does not acknowledge currently used which dilutes courts. ▪County Practice Rules Scientific Stream Protection Zones. focus. ▪Monitor downstream Riparian Review Panel for more effects. information. Properly abandon logging roads SCWD and SLVWD Continue. Property Owner Resource Enforcement level difficult to Continue Property Owner Resource to restore the natural landscape have history of Management Division, determine due to remote Management Division, (e.g., slope) in sensitive areas advocating for this. RWQCB, County, DFG nature of primarily private RWQCB, County, DFG such as adjoining watercourses. parcels.

Water Purveyors should Water Purveyors Partnerships with land trusts ▪SLVWD acquired 188 Continue Water Purveyors investigate opportunities for and alternative funding acres in Malosky Creek watershed property sources may enable this. watershed from acquisition/conservation Sempervirens - there will easements. be a conservation easement on the property that prohibits commercial timber harvesting. ▪Sempervirens purchased 425 acres of Lompico headwaters from timber company.

Lobby Board of Supervisors to Water Purveyors assign County GIS department to complete a road density analysis for key water-supply watersheds.

▪Initiate water purveyor focused Water Purveyors, discussion with RWQCB on RWQCB water supply issues. ▪Consider region-specific rules to reduce sediment from failing colluvial wedges and roadway gullying, or studies to develop appropriate rules.

206081 Table 6-3 03-20-07.xls; Sheet1 5 of 10 Table 6-3 Recommendations

Category Recommendations 1996 2000 Status Recommendations 2000 Responsible Agency Notes 2006 Status Recommendations 2006 Responsible Agency Notes

Coping With Develop plans to minimize SCWD currently Continue. Water Purveyors, Property Sudden Oak Death and Continue Water Purveyors, Fire erosion-induced turbidity assessing fuels Owners, CDF-Fire related fuel levels make this Property Owners, CDF- problems caused by fire areas. conditions on Protection Division, an increasingly important Fire Protection Division, watershed properties Community Groups, issue. Community Groups, with goals of protecting County County water quality and quantity. Establish plans to augment the SCWD does have Continue. Water Purveyor, County, SCWD does have multiple Develop formal response Develop plans to meet water- Water Purveyor County, Lesson of 1948 Pine water supply or restrict water use multiple sources and DWR, NMFS, DFG sources and the historically plans, either as part of supply needs during periods of D DWR, NMFS s, FG, Mountain fire, followed during and after fires in the historically proven proven ability to respond to emergency planning or persistent turbidity which may by years of persistent watershed. ability to respond to emergencies. ESA and other watershed mgmt last through one or more turbidity emergencies. Currently resource management needs summers; anticipate sediment assessing emergency make this increasingly pulses with multi-year duration preparedness in this difficult. regard.

Develop plans to manage fuel ▪SCWD currently Continue. CDF – Fire Protection ▪Grant-funded CDF Continue CDF – Fire Protection capacity and reduce the potential assessing fuels Division, County, Fire Lompico/Loch Lomond Division, County, Fire of wildfire hazards. condition on watershed Districts, Water Purveyors, fire break. ▪RCD Districts, Water properties. ▪Recently Community Groups, RCD produced "Living with Purveyors, Community initiated County-wide. Fire" newsletter. ▪Tan Groups, RCD oaks have not been managed.

Investigate opportunities for Water Purveyors Partnerships with land trusts ▪SLVWD acquired 188 Continue Water Purveyors watershed property acquisition/ and alternative funding acres in Malosky Creek conservation easements. sources may enable this. watershed from Sempervirens. ▪Sempervirens recently purchased 425 acres of Lompico headwaters from timber company.

206081 Table 6-3 03-20-07.xls; Sheet1 6 of 10 Table 6-3 Recommendations

Category Recommendations 1996 2000 Status Recommendations 2000 Responsible Agency Notes 2006 Status Recommendations 2006 Responsible Agency Notes

Water Quality Develop an inter-agency water RWQCB is currently ▪Continue ▪Water Purveyors RWQCB, County, MBNMS is working in ▪Regional online ▪Implement regional database, RWQCB, County, Monitoring quality database to facilitate data working on this through should develop and maintain Monterey Bay National partnership with the local non database not yet perhaps GIS based. ▪Continue Monterey Bay National evaluation. the Central Coast databases in order to facilitate Marine Sanctuary, Water profits to develop citizen and available. ▪Bacterial data bacterial data release - extend to Marine Sanctuary, Water Ambient Water Quality expansion and coordination of Purveyors. monitoring database which is available on weekly basis smaller purveyors. Purveyors. Monitoring Program. such. intended to be linked to inter- agency database.

Monitor for total and fecal SCWD has increased ▪Continue. ▪All water purveyors RWQCB, County, Water County EPA funds will ▪Bacteria monitoring has Continue RWQCB, County, Water coliform bacteria in each water fecal coliform may consider starting/increasing Purveyors provide for study of been expanded. ▪Some Purveyors source. monitoring. this monitoring. ▪Expand persistent turbidity and data evaluation has been enterococcus, and other pathogens. This information conducted to identify monitoring which would further should guide future sources. define sources of pollutants. monitoring and watershed management needs in this area. ▪SCWD currently ▪Monitor flow, turbidity at all Water Purveyors This information will be Turbidity monitoring has Continue Water Purveyors investigating this. surface water intakes. ▪Provide useful not only in treatment been increased at all ▪SLVWD has turbidity data in electronic format so that policy, but also in general surface water intakes. monitoring at surface trends are more easily assessed water supply management. Water intakes. on a regional basis.

▪Investigate opportunities for SCWD, RWQCB, DHS, Prop. 13 funds may support. Continue SCWD, RWQCB, DHS, biostimulation, TOC and related County County studies on San Lorenzo River with regard to nitrates and DBP precursors. ▪Expand nutrient monitoring at SCWD, RWQCB, DHS, Data will provide better ▪Chlorophyll monitoring Continue SCWD, RWQCB, DHS, Felton Diversion and nutrient, County understanding of algae now done routinely. County chlorophyll and algae monitoring blooms. SCWD initiate ▪Nutrient monitoring has at Loch Lomond. program in 1999. not been expanded.

Add pesticides and herbicides to SCWD, County All Bay Area urban the monitoring program - perhaps streams, including San during first flush sampling. Francisquito Creek --an adjoining watershed -- are 303(d) listed for diazinon.

▪Initiate TOC monitoring on SCWD TOC data will provide Done as required for Expand TOC monitoring SCWD sources. necessary information for regulatory compliance meeting requirements of the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment and Disinfection Byproduct Rules.

206081 Table 6-3 03-20-07.xls; Sheet1 7 of 10 Table 6-3 Recommendations

Category Recommendations 1996 2000 Status Recommendations 2000 Responsible Agency Notes 2006 Status Recommendations 2006 Responsible Agency Notes

Emergency Develop a contact list of water Currently exists. ▪Implement drills. ▪Update County, Water Purveyors Potential for significant Update in progress ▪Continue. ▪Improve County, Water Purveyors, Plans purveyors to inform them of contacts list and reporting chemical spills exists in (including autodial of collaboration with County Cities of Santa Cruz and (Chemical impending problems (e.g., fires, protocols. ▪Develop better maps North Coast and San Lorenzo water purveyors) Hazardous Material Section. Scotts Valley Spills, etc.) chemical spills) upstream of for haz-mat response crews. Watersheds. SCWD staff surface water intakes. have been actively working with County to improve response.

All water purveyors Keep Emergency Plans updated. Water Purveyors prepared vulnerability assessments and updated emergency response plans in response to 911

Small Confirm that purveyors with less Currently exists. Continue. County, DHS County Env. Health is ▪Continue ▪Add data to regional County, DHS Treatment than 200 service connections are implementing database Systems in compliance with SWTR requirements, including minimum disinfection requirements.

Feral Pigs Water Purveyors should DFG, Water Purveyors, Still legal to introduce pigs City evaluated feral pig ▪Evaluate need for DFG, Water Purveyors, Periodic problem as investigate merits of pig State Parks, other large for sport hunting. Pigs may impacts in Watershed implementation of pig eradication State Parks, other large pigs range widely eradication programs. land owners. breed faster than they can be Lands Plan. plan. ▪Focus on pig tracking. land owners. within large territories. feasibly hunted. Increased pig activity has been observed in the Newell and Majors watersheds since the previous Sanitary Survey.

206081 Table 6-3 03-20-07.xls; Sheet1 8 of 10 Table 6-3 Recommendations

Category Recommendations 1996 2000 Status Recommendations 2000 Responsible Agency Notes 2006 Status Recommendations 2006 Responsible Agency Notes

Watershed ▪Water purveyors should be more SCWD implemented ▪Provide education and outreach Water Purveyors. Water Purveyors should ▪SLVWD Watershed Continue Water Purveyors. Management active in watershed management, Watershed Protection to property owners and other investigate opportunity to use Protection Plan will be including the inspection and Program in FY 99-00. watershed stakeholders. Prop. 13 and US EPA Clean updated in early 2007. public education aspects. These activities are ▪Participate in environmental Water Act Section 319 funds ▪SCWD Watershed ongoing. review activities. to support such efforts. Lands Plan and HCP in progress. ▪County to update 1979 Watershed Plan. ▪Watershed managers should Political and financial ▪Develop staff/staff time for Water Purveyors, County Propositions 12 and 13, as SCWD donated funds to Continue Water Purveyors, County solicit assistance and support support currently exists. project development, grant well as numerous Salmonid RCD for outreach from alternative sources. Purveyors have writing/administration, etc. ▪See Restoration oriented funding activities. Requests for support should increasingly sought recommendations of forthcoming sources can substantially include justification for purveyorsgrant funding for SCWD Watershed Resources supplement existing budgets. to ask their respective projects. County has Management Plan. boards/councils for additional long record of success funding, time commitment, etc. with alternative funding. ▪Watershed managers should Purveyors, County, ▪Utilize Proposition 12 and 13 Purveyors, County Water SCWD Watershed Resources SCWD prepared ▪Continue. ▪Develop integrated Purveyors; County continue to integrate other increasingly promoting funds, CA DFG Salmonid Management Plan should Integrated Water Plan in standards for sandy soils that will (multiple offices), benefits of watershed protection the multiple benefits of Restoration Program, etc. for identify projects which would 2003 simultaneously address erosion, RWQCB, Purveyors, EPA into the program in order to source water protection implementation of projects that achieve multiple goals in this recharge, gw nitrate, wetland, and obtain public funds available for special status protect Salmonid habitat and realm. habitat loss issues. from non-traditional sources. species and drinking provide drinking water source water quality. -SCWD protection. ▪Develop staff/staff received EPA time for project development, Environmental grant writing/administration etc. Education Grant in FY 1999-2000 and is currently seeking funds for other education and watershed assessment projects.

206081 Table 6-3 03-20-07.xls; Sheet1 9 of 10 Table 6-3 Recommendations

Category Recommendations 1996 2000 Status Recommendations 2000 Responsible Agency Notes 2006 Status Recommendations 2006 Responsible Agency Notes

Wateshed ▪Increase staff effort to SCWD began ▪Lobby County to develop a Water Purveyors, County, Partially dependent on Two full-time staff in Continue efforts to increase staff Water Purveyors, County, Management implement watershed development of Planning Code Compliance RWQCB recommendations of the water resources RWQCB (cont.) management practices. Watershed Protection positions that are solely focused Watershed Assessment management were added Program in 1997. on natural resource issues. currently being conducted by to SCWD since the 2001 Program was SCWD. Grant funding will update. implemented in 1999. be more easily obtained Currently reassessing through purveyor Recreation staff levels partnerships and and functions. Coundy collaboration with non-profit initiated Water conservation groups. SCCo Resources program in General Plan is currently 1999. RWQCB being updated. Focus on increased staffing in watershed management with response to regard to livestock in North requirements for TMDs Coast watersheds should be in FY 1999-2000. included. SCCo General Plan Currently being updated.

▪Continue to develop GIS Water Purveyors, SCWD currently developing All agencies have GIS Continue Water Purveyors, mapping tools. RWQCB, County, DHS some data layers and City at staff and development RWQCB, County, DHS large is recruiting a GIS Coordinator. County has extensive database. Prop 13 funds may support this.

SLVWD implemented an Continue to implement grant SLVWD educational grant program. program to enhance watershed understanding.

206081 Table 6-3 03-20-07.xls; Sheet1 10 of 10

Table 6-4 Suggested Monitoring Parameters to Augment Current Programs

Parameter Purpose General Sample Sample Frequency Location Large Systems Medium Systems Small Systems

Total Coliform General Individual raw water 1 to 2 1 to 2 Quarterly to Bacteria contaminant intakes and blended samples/week samples/month annually monitoring waters

Fecal Coliform or E. Specific Blended raw water 1 to 2 1 to 2 Quarterly to Coli Bacteria contaminant samples/week samples/month annually monitoring

Giardia Cysts and Determine Selected intakes or Quarterly Bi-annually N/A Cryptosporidium pathogen loading in blended raw water (summer and during Oocysts streams first storm event)

Turbidity Determine threshold At all intakes Daily or continuous Daily or continuous Daily grab samples level for the treatment plant; monitor upstream watershed protection

Alkalinity, Monitor general All intakes and raw 1 to 3 2 to 4 samples/ Quarterly to bi- Hardness, TDS mineral content water blends samples/week month annually (Conductivity)

Total Organic Monitor general All raw waters 1 to 2 samples per Monthly to quarterly N/A Carbon or UV- natural organic month (UV); Absorbance matter monthly (TOC)

Color (True and Can use true color All raw waters 1 to 3 Monthly Annually Apparent) as a surrogate to samples/week organic matter

Nitrate, Nitrite, and Monitor wastewater All raw waters Weekly to monthly Monthly to quarterly Quarterly to Ammonia discharges (septic annually systems) upstream of intakes

PCE and Toluene Monitor existing Felton Diversion Monthly N/A N/A spills (SCWD only)

Threshold Odor Monitor taste and All raw waters Weekly to monthly Monthly Annually Number (or Flavor odor trends Profile)

Iron, Manganese, Identify anoxic Loch Lomond (at Weekly to bi- N/A N/A and Dissolved zones in reservoirs various depths) monthly Oxygen

Trace Metals Specific Selected raw water Annually during first N/A N/A (Copper and Zinc) contaminant intakes flush monitoring

Pesticides and Specific Selected raw water Annually during first N/A N/A Herbicides contaminant intakes flush monitoring

206081 Table 6-4 03-09-07.doc

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Appendix A Sanitary Survey Bibliography

APPENDIX A

Bibliography and References Cited

Akers, J.P., and Jackson, L.E., Jr., 1976, Potential for developing ground water in western Santa Cruz County, California, with particular emphasis on the Santa Margarita sandstone: U.S. Geological Survey Misc. Field Studies Map.

Alley, D.W., 1997, Comparison of juvenile steelhead densities in 1981 and 1994-7 in the San Lorenzo River and tributaries, Santa Cruz County, California, with an estimate of juvenile population size in the mainstem river and expected adult returns from that production: D.W. Alley & Associates consulting report prepared for the City of Santa Cruz Water Department and the San Lorenzo Valley Water District. 62 p.

Alley, D.W., 1997, Comparison of juvenile steelhead densities, 1997 through 2001, in the San Lorenzo River and tributaries, with an index of adult returns: D.W. Alley & Associates consulting report prepared for the City of Santa Cruz Water Department, National Marine Fisheries Service and the San Lorenzo Valley Water District. 71 p.

Alley, D.W., Dvorsky, J., Ricker, J., Schroeder, K., and Smith, J., 2004, San Lorenzo River salmonid enhancement plan: Swanson Hydrology & Geomorphology and D.W.Alley & Associates consulting report prepared for Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Services, 101 p.

Aston, R., and Ricker, J., 1979, Water quality technical section, San Lorenzo River watershed management plan: Santa Cruz County Planning Department Report, 116 p.

Aston, R.P. and Johansen, R.R., 1976, An assessment of water quality in Santa Cruz County -- problems, needs, and programs: County of Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors. County Office of Watershed Management

Battleson, K.G., 1966, San Lorenzo River watershed water quality investigation: State of California Department of Water Resources. Bulletin No. 143-1. 166 p.

Berry, C., 2001, Watershed sanitary survey for the San Lorenzo and North Coast watershed, January 2001: An update to the San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast watersheds sanitary survey, July 1996: City of Santa Cruz staff report, 52 p.

206081 Appendix A bibliography 03-20-07.doc A-1

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Appendix A Sanitary Survey Bibliography

Brown, W.M., III, 1973, Erosion processes, fluvial sediment transport, and reservoir sedimentation in a part of the Newell and Zayante Creek basins, Santa Cruz County, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, August 3, 1973, 31 p.

Butler, T., 1978, An assessment of algal growth and eutrophication in the San Lorenzo River: Santa Cruz County Office of Watershed Management report, 38 p.

California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Central Coast region, 2000, San Lorenzo River watershed nitrate total maximum daily load for Santa Cruz, California: September 15, 2000, 41 p.

California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Central Coast Region, 2001, Proposal to delist San Lorenzo River lagoon for siltation: Staff report Attachment 5, July 27, 2001, 14 p.

Camp Dresser & McKee Inc., 1994, Water supply alternatives study: Consulting report prepared for the City of Santa Cruz Water Department

Camp Dresser & McKee Inc., 1992, Water treatment alternative study phase 3 report and data summary – Volume 1:. Consulting report prepared for the City of Santa Cruz Water Department. 1992

Camp Dresser & McKee Inc., 1996, San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast watersheds sanitary survey: Consulting report prepared for the City of Santa Cruz and cooperators in association with Archibald & Wallberg, and Balance Hydrologics, Inc. Multipaged + 4 appendices

Carlson, D., 2005, Study session on status of mining permits, reclamation and end-use considerations. Letter prepared for members of the Santa Cruz County Planning Commission by Santa Cruz County Planning Department. Multi-paged.

Chartrand, S.M., and Hecht, B., 2005, Draft WY2005 Liddell Spring data report, Santa Cruz County, California. Consulting report prepared for the City of Santa Cruz. 3 p. + figures.

Council of Bay Area Resource Conservation Districts (CABRCD)and USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2001, Horsekeeping: a guide to land management for clean water, 108 pages.

206081 Appendix A bibliography 03-20-07.doc A-2

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Appendix A Sanitary Survey Bibliography

EMKO Environmental, 1999, Hydrogeologic report for mining plan amendment application, Bonny Doon Quarry, Santa Cruz County, California. Consulting report prepared for RMC Pacific Materials. Multi-paged.

Fogelman, R.P., and Johnson, K.L., 1985, Capacity and sedimentation of Loch Lomond reservoir, Santa Cruz County, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 85-485, 24 p.

Gaikowski, M.P., Hamilton, S.J., Buhl, K.J., McDonald, S.F., and Siummers, C.H., 1996, Acute toxicity of three fire-retardant and two fire-suppressant foam formulations to the early life stages of rainbow trout (Oncorhyncus mykiss), J. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, v. 15(8), pp. 1365-1374.

Golling, R.C., 1983, Santa Cruz County soil cadmium study: the natural occurrence of high-cadmium soils and the levels of cadmium incorporated into associated field grown leafy vegetables: Santa Cruz County Planning Dept., Santa Cruz, CA.

Hecht, B., Shepherd, W.E., and Bronson, M.T., 1968, Environs of UC Santa Cruz, Phase II – Physical factors element of the UC Environs General Plan, County of Santa Cruz. Multipaged.

Hecht, B., 1975, Salinization in shallow groundwaters, central Bear Creek drainage: Consulting report prepared for Landino Drilling, 10 p. + appendices.

Hecht, B., 1977, The hydrology of Hare Creek and the impact of proposed water diversion:, Hydrology section of EIR prepared for the State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water Rights

Hecht, B., and Enkeboll, R., 1980, Channel and substrate conditions, sediment transport, and alternative approaches for sediment management in Zayante Creek below the proposed Zayante Dam: H. Esmaili & Assoc. report prepared for D.W. Kelley, Aquatic Biologist, 93 p.

Hecht, B. and Kittleson, G., 1998, An assessment of streambed conditions and erosion control effects in the San Lorenzo River watershed, Santa Cruz County, California: Balance Hydrologics, Inc. consulting report prepared for Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Department. 77 p.

206081 Appendix A bibliography 03-20-07.doc A-3

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Appendix A Sanitary Survey Bibliography

Hecht, B., 1978, Hydrologic and water-quality impacts of the proposed expansion of Felton Quarry: H. Esmaili & Associates report for Environ, 54 p. + 2 apps. plus related responses to comments.

Hecht, B., Smith, J., Alley, D., and Kelley, D.W., 1984, North-central Santa Cruz County water supply master plan study -- an analysis of resource problems: Task C Final Report. Consulting report by HEA, a Division of Kleinfelder & Associates.

Hecht, B., White, C., and Flaschka, I., 1991, A nitrate budget-based assessment of potential nonpoint-source control measures to reduce nitrate delivery to the San Lorenzo watershed, Santa Cruz County, California: Balance Hydrologics, Inc., consulting report to Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Services. 101 p.

Herbert, E., 2007, Forest management by West Coast water utilities: Protecting the source?: Journal of the American Water Works Association, v. 99, no. 2, p.91-106.

Hydro Analysis, Inc., 2006, Quarterly groundwater monitoring report, second quarter 2006: Consulting report. 20 p.

Ivanetich, K.M., Hsu, P., Wunderlich, K.M., Messenger, E., Walkup, W.G., IV, Scott, T.M., Lukasik, J., and Davis, J., 2006, Microbial source tracking by DNA sequence analysis of the Escherichia coli malate dehydrogenase gene: Journal Microbiological Methods, v. 67, no. 507-526

Johnson, N.M., 1988, Evaluation of elevated nitrate concentrations in the Quail Hollow wells field with the use of a groundwater flow model: Consulting report to the San Lorenzo Valley Water District. 66 p.

Johnson, N.M., Hecht, B., and Esmaili, H., 1982, San Lorenzo Valley on-site wastewater disposal management study: HEA, a division of J.H. Kleinfelder & Associates. 185 p.

Johnson, N.M., 1999, Estimated discharge of surface water sources: Consulting report prepared for San Lorenzo Valley Water District, March 1999.

Johnson, N.M., 2002, Drinking water source assessment, Santa Cruz Water Department, Laguna Creek diversion: California Department of Health services, PS Code E44/010-LAGUNAD, December 2002, 17 p. + tables and figures.

206081 Appendix A bibliography 03-20-07.doc A-4

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Appendix A Sanitary Survey Bibliography

Johnson, N.M., 2002, Drinking water source assessment, Santa Cruz Water Department, Liddell spring: California Department of Health services, PS Code 10S/03W-26N01 M, December 2002, 13 p. + tables and figures.

Johnson, N.M., 2002, Drinking water source assessment, Santa Cruz Water Department, Lock Lomond Reservoir: California Department of Health services, PS Code E44/010-LOCHLO, December 2002, 18 p. + tables and figures.

Johnson, N.M., 2002, Drinking water source assessment, Santa Cruz Water Department, Majors Creek diversion: California Department of Health services, PS Code E44/010-RAWMAJ, December 2002, 17 p. + tables and figures.

Johnson, N.M., 2002, Drinking water source assessment, Santa Cruz Water Department, Reggiardo Creek diversion: California Department of Health services, PS Code E44/010-LAGUNAD, December 2002, 17 p. + tables and figures.

Johnson, N.M., 2002, Drinking water source assessment, Santa Cruz Water Department, San Lorenzo River Felton diversion: California Department of Health services, PS Code E44/010-FELTOND, December 2002, 21 p. + tables and figures.

Johnson, N.M., 2002, Drinking water source assessment, Santa Cruz Water Department, San Lorenzo River at Tait Street diversion: California Department of Health services, PS Code E44/010-TAITSTR, December 2002, 21 p. + tables and figures.

Johnson, N.M., 2003, Drinking water source assessment, Santa Cruz Water Department, Beltz well 07 – raw: California Department of Health services, PS Code 4410010-006, January 2003, 11 p. + tables and figures.

Johnson, N.M., 2003, Drinking water source assessment, Santa Cruz Water Department, Beltz well 08 – raw: California Department of Health services, PS Code 4410010-024, January 2003, 11 p. + tables and figures.

Johnson, N.M., 2003, Drinking water source assessment, Santa Cruz Water Department, Beltz well 09 – raw: California Department of Health services, PS Code 4410010-025, January 2003, 11 p. + tables and figures.

206081 Appendix A bibliography 03-20-07.doc A-5

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Appendix A Sanitary Survey Bibliography

Johnson, N.M., 2003, Drinking water source assessment, Santa Cruz Water Department, Tait Street well 01 – raw: California Department of Health services, PS Code 4410010-019, January 2003, 11 p. + tables and figures.

Johnson, N.M., 2003, Drinking water source assessment, Santa Cruz Water Department, Tait Street well 04 – surface influence - raw: California Department of Health services, PS Code 4410010-022, January 2003, 11 p. + tables and figures.

Johnson, N.M., 2005, Drinking water source assessment, Santa Cruz Water Department, Beltz well 10 – raw: California Department of Health services, PS Code 0110001-, September 2005, multipaged.

Kennedy/Jenks Engineers, 1985, Evaluation and cost estimate of water supply alternatives -- northern Santa Cruz County: Consulting report prepared for County- wide Water Master Plan Study task force.

Launer, R., and Leach, C., 1976, Water quality report – Loch Lomond Reservoir: City of Santa Cruz Water Department. August 1976.

Lawson, A.C. (ed.), 1908, The California earthquake of April 18, 1906: Reprinted 1969 by the Carnegie Institution of Washington, D.C.

Leedshill-Heckenhoff, Inc., 1989, Water Master Plan: City of Santa Cruz Water Department. April 1989.

MacPherson, K.., and Harmon, J.G., 2000, Storage capacity and sedimentation of Loch Lomond Reservoir, Santa Cruz County, California, 1998: USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 00-4016

Majmundar, H.H., 1980, Distribution of heavy elements hazardous to health, Salinas Valley region, California: California Division of Mines and Geology Special Report 138, 57 p.

McCloud, J., Bucher, E., and Doan, T., 2005, 2005 Urban watch-first flush storm drain monitoring program in the City of Scotts Valley, Santa Cruz County, California – program period June 29 to October 28, 2005: Program administered by the Coastal Watershed Council for the County of Santa Cruz Public Works Department, 23 p. + appendices.

206081 Appendix A bibliography 03-20-07.doc A-6

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Appendix A Sanitary Survey Bibliography

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), 1996, Making endangered species act determinations of effect for individual or grouped actions at the watershed scale: NMFS Environmental and Technical Services Division, Habitat Conservation Branch, August 1996, 16 p. + appendices.

Pacific Geotechnical Engineering in association with Balance Hydrologics, 2002, Landslide investigation, Liddell Spring landslide, Bonny Doon Quarry, Santa Cruz County, California. Consulting report prepared for County of Santa Cruz Planning Department. Multi-paged + appendices.

P.E. LaMoreaux & Associates Inc., 2005a, Karst Investigation Report and Delineation of Capture Zone of Liddell Spring, Santa Cruz County, California. Volumes 1 and 2. Consulting report prepared for RMC Pacific Materials. Multipaged + appendices.

P.E. LaMoreaux & Associates Inc., 2005b, Response to comments made by the City of Santa Cruz made on the Karst Investigation Report and Delineation of Capture Zone of Liddell Spring, Santa Cruz County, California. Consulting report prepared for CEMEX. Multipaged + appendices.

P.E. LaMoreaux & Associates Inc., 2006, Summary of Multi-variate statistical analysis of the impact of blasting on turbidity at Liddell Spring, Santa Cruz County, California. Consulting report prepared for CEMEX. Multipaged + appendices.

Phillips, R.D., and S. Rojstaczer, 2001, Chemical weathering in a region of active orogeny: Pescadero Creek, California: Global Biogeochemical Cycles v 15, no. 2, p. 383.

Questa Engineering Corporation and San Jose State University, 1990, San Lorenzo River Nitrate Biostimulation Assessment Draft Report: Consulting report prepared for Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Service. 1990.

Reimold, Robert, J., 1998, Watershed management – practice, policies and coordination: McGraw-Hill. San Francisco.

Ricker J., Aston, R., Singer, S., Johansen, R., and Mensch, J., 1976, Preliminary report on the San Lorenzo River Watershed Planning Process: Report by staff of the Santa Cruz County Office of Watershed Management and California Department of Fish Game, 115 p.

206081 Appendix A bibliography 03-20-07.doc A-7

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Appendix A Sanitary Survey Bibliography

Ricker, J., 1979, Hydrology technical section, San Lorenzo River watershed management plan: Santa Cruz County Planning Department staff report, 77p.

Ricker, J., 1989, An evaluation of wastewater disposal and water quality in the San Lorenzo River watershed--preliminary report: Environmental Health Service, Health Services Agency, County of Santa Cruz, 304 p. + appendices.

Ricker, J., Hantzsche, N., Hecht, B., and Kolb, H., 1994, Area-wide wastewater management for the San Lorenzo River watershed, California: Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on Individual and Small Community Sewage Systems, American Soc. of Agricultural Engineers. 10 p.

Ricker, J., 1995, Draft San Lorenzo nitrate management plan phase II final report: County of Santa Cruz Health Services Agency Environmental Health Services. 51 p

Ricker, J., et al., 1998, San Lorenzo wastewater management plan – Program status report 1996-1998: County of Santa Cruz Environmental Health Services. March 2000.

Ricker, J., Peters, S., and Golling, R., 2001, Evaluation of urban water quality, task 4 report, San Lorenzo River watershed management plan update: County of Santa Cruz Water Resources Program, Environmental Health Services, Health Services Agency, August 2001, 69 p.

Ricker, J. and Peters, S., 2006, Assessment of sources of bacterial contamination at Santa Cruz County beaches: County of Santa Cruz, Health Services Agency, Environmental Health Services, Water Resources Program, March, 2006, 71 p.

Santa Cruz County, 1984, San Lorenzo nitrogen control measures demonstration project: Staff report.

Santa Cruz County Community Resources Agency, 1977, Growth management program: Environmental report, Chapter V and Technical Appendix C, Water quality impacts:

Santa Cruz County Health Services Agency, Environmental Health Service, 1994, A Guide to Greywater Sumps: 1994.

206081 Appendix A bibliography 03-20-07.doc A-8

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Appendix A Sanitary Survey Bibliography

Santa Cruz County Health Services Agency, Water Resources Program, 1994: Turbidity and pathogen control efforts in the San Lorenzo River watershed, Santa Cruz, California, Draft of November 2004, 33 p.

Santa Cruz County Health Services Agency, Environmental Health Service, 2003, San Lorenzo wastewater management plan, program status report 1999-2001: May 2003, 33 p.

Santa Cruz County Office of Emergency Services, 2005, Draft operational area emergence management plan (EMP): September 2005, 63 p.

Santa Cruz County Office of Watershed Management, 1977, Water quality surrounding solid waste disposal sites of Santa Cruz County: Staff report. June 1977.

Santa Cruz County Planning Department, 1979, The San Lorenzo River watershed management plan: Developed in conjunction with the State of California Resources Agency. Adopted by the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors. December 18, 1979.

Santa Cruz County Water Resources Program, 2001, Draft San Lorenzo River watershed management plan update: December 2001, 77 p.

San Lorenzo River Watershed Management Plan Update Technical Advisory Committee, 1995: October 26, 1995 meeting package. Santa Cruz County staff report.

SECOR, 2005, Monitoring report for Chevron-branded seervice station 9-9409, 6325 Highway 9, Felton, 2nd quarter: Consulting report.

Smith, J.J., and Alley, D.W., 1982, Fish habitat assessments for Santa Cruz County streams: Harvey & Stanley Associates consulting report prepared for Santa Cruz County Planning Department, 59 p.

Swanson M., and Dvorsky, J., 2001, Zayante area sediment-source study: Swanson Hydrology & Geomorphology report prepared for the County of Santa Cruz Environmental Health Services. 75 p. + 4 appendices

206081 Appendix A bibliography 03-20-07.doc A-9

Balance Hydrologics, Inc.

San Lorenzo Valley and North Coast Watersheds Appendix A Sanitary Survey Bibliography

Sylvester, M., and Covay, K., 1978, Stream quality in the San Lorenzo River basin, Santa Cruz County, California, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 78- 19, 61 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002, Valeteria Dry Cleaners removal notice, 3 p.

Watkins-Johnson Environmental Inc., 1992, Bonny Doon Quarry area hydrogeologic evaluation report. Consulting report prepared for RMC Lonestar. Multi-paged.

White, C. and Hecht, B., 1994, San Lorenzo River nitrogen control measure project: Quail Hollow Ranch Regional Park Stables: Balance Hydrologics consulting report prepared for Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Services. 36 p. + appendices

White, C. and Hecht, B., 1993, A comparative study of nitrate movement below a deep and a shallow leachfield in sandy (Zayante) soils, Glen Arbor area, Santa Cruz County, Balance Hydrologics report prepared for the Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Service, September 1993 draft report, 43 p + appendices.

Williamson, R.L, Channaveerappa, N., and Sanchez, L., 1992, San Lorenzo River nitrate biostimulation assessment study, R. Williamson and others report to Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Services, June 1992 Final Report, 138 p. + appendices.

206081 Appendix A bibliography 03-20-07.doc A-10

Appendix B Federal and State Drinking Water Standards

DHS Drinking Water Standards (mg/l) EPA Drinking Water Standards (mg/l)

Primary MCL (mg/L) Secondary MCL MCLG (mg/L) Primary MCL (mg/L) Secondary MCL (mg/L) Contaminant (mg/L) Inorganic Aluminum 0.05-2 1 0.2 Antimony 0.006 0.006 0.006 Arsenic 0.01 0.05 Asbestos 7 MFLa 7 MFLa 7 MFLa Barium 2 2 1 Beryllium 0.004 0.004 0.004 Cadmium 0.005 0.005 0.005 Chloride 250/500/ 250 600j Chromium 0.1 0.1 0.05 Color 15 CUb 15 CUb Copper 1.3(TT)c 1.3(TT)c 1 Corrosivity non-corrosive non-corrosive Cyanide 0.2 0.2 0.15 Fluoride 4 2 4 2 Foaming Agents 0.5 0.5 Iron 0.3 0.3 Lead 0.015(TT)d 0 0.015(TT)d Manganese 0.05 0.05 Mercury 0.002 0.002 0.002 Nickel Remanded 0.1

Nitrate 10 (as N) 10 (as N) 45 (as NO3) Nitrite 1 (as N) 1 (as N) 1 (as N)

20681 Appendix B. MCLs.xls DHS Drinking Water Standards (mg/l) EPA Drinking Water Standards (mg/l)

Primary MCL (mg/L) Secondary MCL MCLG (mg/L) Primary MCL (mg/L) Secondary MCL (mg/L) Contaminant (mg/L) Nitrate + Nitrite 10 (as N) 10 (as N) Odor 3 OTNe 3 OTNe pH 6.5-8.5 Selenium 0.05 0.05 0.05 Silver 0.1 0.1 Sulfate 250 250/500/ 600j Thallium 0.002 0.0005 0.002 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) 500 500/1000/ 1500j Turbidity 0.3-1f NTU 5 NTUk Zinc 5 5 Organic Acrylamide TTg 0 Alachlor 0.002 0 0.002 Atrazine 0.003 0.003 0.001 Bentazon 0.018 Benzene 0.005 0 0.001 Benzo(a)pyrene 0.0002 0 0.0002 Carbofuran 0.04 0.04 0.018 Carbon tetrachloride 0.005 0 0.0005 Chlordane 0.002 0 0.0001 Chlorobenzene 0.1 0.1 0.07 (Monochlorobenzene) 2,4-D 0.07 0.07 0.07 Dalapon 0.2 0.2 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 0.0002 0 0.0002 (DBCP) 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 0.6 0.6 0.6 (o-Dichlorobenzene)

20681 Appendix B. MCLs.xls DHS Drinking Water Standards (mg/l) EPA Drinking Water Standards (mg/l)

Primary MCL (mg/L) Secondary MCL MCLG (mg/L) Primary MCL (mg/L) Secondary MCL (mg/L) Contaminant (mg/L) 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.075 0.005 0.075 (p-Dichlorobenzene) 1,1-Dichloroethane 0.005 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.005 0 0.0005 1,1-Dichloroethylene 0.007 0.007 0.006 cis-1,2- Dichloroethylene 0.07 0.07 0.006 trans-1,2- Dichloroethylene 0.1 0.01 0.1 Dichloromethane (Methylene 0.005 0 0.005 Chloride) 1,3-Dichloropropene - - 0.0005 1,2-Dichloropropane 0.005 0 0.005 Di(2-ethylhexyl) adipate 0.4 0.4 0.4 (Adipates) Di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 0.006 0 0.004 (Phthalates) Dinoseb 0.007 0.007 0.007 Dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD) 3x10-8 0 3x10-8 Diquat 0.02 0.02 0.02 Endothall 0.1 0.1 0.1 Endrin 0.002 0.002 0.002 Epichlorohydrin TTg 0 TTg Ethylbenzene 0.7 0.7 0.3 Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) 0.00005 0 0.00005 (Dibromoethane) Glyphosate 0.7 0.7 0.7 Heptachlor 0.0004 0 0.00001 Heptachlor Epoxide 0.0002 0 0.00001 Hexachlorobenzene 0.001 0 0.001 Hexachloro-cyclopentadiene 0.05 0.05 0.05

20681 Appendix B. MCLs.xls DHS Drinking Water Standards (mg/l) EPA Drinking Water Standards (mg/l)

Primary MCL (mg/L) Secondary MCL MCLG (mg/L) Primary MCL (mg/L) Secondary MCL (mg/L) Contaminant (mg/L) Lindane 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 Methyl-tert-butyl-ether - - 0.013 0.005 (MTBE) Methoxychlor 0.04 0.04 0.03 Molinate 0.02 Oxamyl (Vydate) 0.2 0.2 0.05 Pentachlorophenol 0.001 0 0.001 Picloram 0.5 0.5 0.5 Polychlorinated biphenyls 0.0005 0 0.0005 (PCBs) Simazine 0.004 0.004 0.004 Styrene 0.1 0.1 0.1 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane - - 0.001 Tetrachloroethylene 0.005 0 0.005 Thiobencarb - - 0.07 0.001 Toluene 1 1 0.15 Toxaphene 0.003 0 0.003 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 0.07 0.07 0.005 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.2 0.2 0.2 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.005 0.003 0.005 Trichloroethylene 0.005 0 0.005 Trichlorofluoromethane - - 0.15 1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2- - - 1.2 Trifluoroethane 2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxy 0.05 0.05 0.05 proprionic acid (Silvex) Vinyl Chloride 0.002 0 0.0005 Xylenes (all isomers) 10 10 1.750 Microbial Contaminants Giardia lamblia TTg 0 Heterotrophic plate count TTh n/a

20681 Appendix B. MCLs.xls DHS Drinking Water Standards (mg/l) EPA Drinking Water Standards (mg/l)

Primary MCL (mg/L) Secondary MCL MCLG (mg/L) Primary MCL (mg/L) Secondary MCL (mg/L) Contaminant (mg/L) Legionella TTh 0 Total coliforms P/Ai 0 Viruses TTh 0 Radionuclides Gross alpha particle activity 15 pCi/L 15 pCi/L (excluding uranium and radon) Gross beta particle activity 4 mrem/yr 50 pCi/L

Radium 226+228 5 pCi/L 0 5 pCi/L Strontium-90 8 pCi/L 8 pCi/Lf Tritium 20,000 pCi/L 20,000 pCi/Lf Uranium 0.03 (proposed) 0 20 pCi/L Disinfection Byproducts Bromate 0.01 0 0.01 Chlorite 1.0 0.8 1.0 Haloacetic Acids (HAA5) 0.06 n/a 0.06 Total Trihalomethanes 0.08 n/a 0.1 (TTHMs) Disinfectants

Chloramines (as Cl2)4 4

Chlorine (as Cl2)4 4 Chlorine Dioxide 0.8 0.8

20681 Appendix B. MCLs.xls Legend:

a MFL = million fibers per liter, with fiber length less than 10 microns b CU = color units c Treatment technique (TT) triggered at Action Level of 1300 ppb d Treatment technique (TT) and public notification triggered at Action Level of 15 ppb e OTN = Odor Threshold Numbers f At no time can turbidity (cloudiness of water) go above 5 nephelolometric turbidity units (NTU); systems that filter must ensure that the turbidity go no higher than 1 NTU (0.5 NTU for conventional or direct filtration) in at least 95% of the daily samples in any month. As of January 1, 2002, turbidity may never exceed 1 NTU, and must not exceed 0.3 NTU in 95% of daily samples in any month. g Treatment Technique in lieu of numeric MCL h HPC: no more than 500 bacterial colonies per milliliter Legionella : no limit, but EPA believes that if Giardia and viruses are removed/inactivated, Legionella will also be controlled i MCL is based on the presence/absence of total coliforms j Recommended/Upper/Short Term Maximum k Average turbidity below 1 NTU 95% of the time with no individual reading above 5 NTU.

Abbreviations

AL Action Level DHS Department of Health Services EPA Environmental Protection Agency MCL Maximum Contaminant Level MCLG Maximum Contaminant Level Goal

20681 Appendix B. MCLs.xls; Legend Appendix C. Acres of commercial timber operations active from 2001-2006 in the San Lorenzo River watershed, by subwatershed Data developed by SLVWD staff from California Division of Forestry files

THP or NTMP # Status Completion date Acres Tributary watershed Comment

1-00-160-SCR complete 7/11/2002 75 Bear Creek Bringhurst 1-00-188-SCR complete 1/8/2003 99 Bear Creek 1-00-NTMP-065-SCR active 116 Bear Creek Locatelli 1-99-278-SCR complete 11 Bear Creek no completion report on file 1-99-297-SCR complete 5/23/2001 11 Bear Creek Acres, Bear Creek watershed TOTAL 312 AVERAGE: 62.4 1-00-095-SCR complete 5/1/2001 30 Boulder Creek 1-04-094-SCR complete 5/1/2006 26 Boulder Creek Big Basin water company 1-04-165-SCR active 350 Boulder Creek RMB Trust; Cowell unit south 1-04-NTMP-011-SCR active 364 Boulder Creek Big Basin water company 1-99-301-SCR complete 11/19/2001 50 Boulder Creek 1-98-NTMP-034 Boulder Creek Hoope 1-06-NTMP-017 in review 56.0 Bear Creek (Deer Creek, Little Buck) APN 089-021-15 &16;-58 Smith and Schwarzmann Acres, Boulder Creek watershed TOTAL 876 AVERAGE: 146.0 1-00-087-SCR complete 4/14/2003 110.0 Kings Creek 1-00-373-SCR complete 11/13/2002 117.0 Kings Creek 1-01-016-SCR complete 10/15/2002 70.0 Kings Creek 1-06-031-SCR in review 88.0 Kings Creek Boy Scouts of Amer. 1-99-NTMP-053-SCR active 74.0 Kings Creek 1-01-189-SCR complete 6/15/2004 314.5 Kings Creek (Fat Buck) 1-06-082-SCR in review 35.0 Kings Creek (Spring, Brackenbrae) 1-01-225-SCR complete 9/26/2002 32.0 Kings Creek (Two Bar) 1-04-NTMP-017-SCR active 56.0 Kings Creek (Two Bar) 1-05-159-SCR active 59.0 Kings Creek (Two Bar) APN-089-051-10 1-99-NTMP-003-SCR active 130.0 Kings Creek (Two Bar) Redwood Christian Park 1-06-082-SCR in review 35 Kings Creek (Spring Creek) APN 083-011-08; 083-151-19 Acres, Kings Creek watershed TOTAL 1120.5 AVERAGE: 93.4 1-99-040-SCR amd.#2 complete 10/30/2002 43 Love Creek 1-99-148-SCR complete 7/28/2003 164 Love Creek 1-99-040-SCR complete 10/30/2002 74 Love Creek (Fritch Creek) Acres, Love Creek watershed TOTAL 281 AVERAGE: 93.7 1-02-089-SCR active 35 Newell Creek 1-99-104-SCR complete 4/10/2002 194 Newell Creek 1-99-278-SCR complete 12 Newell Creek

206081 Appendix C Timber Harvests 2001-2006 3-20-07.xls; Sheet1 THP or NTMP # Status Completion date Acres Tributary watershed Comment 1-97-NTMP-027 430 Newell Creek (E. Branch) 1-96-NTMP-018 223 Newell Creek Foxx 1-00-NTMP-066 188 Newell Creek (above Loch Lomond) Dousman Acres, Newell Creek watershed TOTAL 1082 AVERAGE: 180.3 1-00-247-SCR complete 11/17/2005 127 San Lorenzo River (Manson Creek) 1-02-NTMP-007-SCR active 31 San Lorenzo River 1-05-126-SCR active 43 San Lorenzo River (Shingle Mill Creek) Acres, small Ssn Lorenzo tributary watersheds 201 AVERAGE: 67.0 1-00-323-SCR complete 7/5/2002 29 Zayante Creek 1-00-NTMP-006-SCR active 115 Zayante Creek 1-01-NTMP-016-SCR active 124 Zayante Creek 1-99-104-SCR complete 4/10/2002 4 Zayante Creek 1-06-122-SCR in review 122 Zayante Creek (Bean Creek) 1-96-NTMP-018-SCR active 107 Zayante Creek (Lompico Creek) Foxx (active 2004) 1-05-030-SCR active 68 Zayante Creek (Lompico) APN 075-311-03 CanhamVentures 1-04-NTMP-005-SCR 113 Zayante Creek (Bean & Carbonera) Brassfield Acres, Zayante Cr. (incl. Mtn Charlie, Lompico, Bean Cr.) 682 AVERAGE: 85.3 OVERALL TOTAL 4554.5 OVERALL AVERAGE: 105.9

Notes

1. The following THPs were withdrawn or had approval rescinded during the 2001-2006 period 1-01-170-SCR approval rescinded 8/25/05 202 Zayante (Lompico) Lompico #1 1-05-158-SCR withdrawn 202 Zayante (Lompico) Lompico #2; purchased by Sempervirens Fund

2. The following THPs were filed, and believed conducted, just prior to the 2001-6 period; these would logically be affecting the stream system 1-00-262-SCR withdrawn 7 Kings Creek 1-99-043-SCR complete 4/15/2000 32 Bear Creek 1-99-105-SCR complete 4/15/2000 26 Boulder Creek 1-99-007-SCR complete 4/15/2000 16 San Lorenzo River 1-99-009-SCR complete 10/15/2000 72 Kings Creek

3. There were none in the small Felton drainages or Fall Creek drainage

206081 Appendix C Timber Harvests 2001-2006 3-20-07.xls; Sheet1